Now, it's back. New code, new approach, hopefully usable site.
It looks that this has been reverted
On 2nd of April 2018, Simon Riggs committed patch:
MERGE SQL Command following SQL:2016 MERGE performs actions that modify rows in the target table using a source table or query. MERGE provides a single SQL statement that can conditionally INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE rows a task that would other require multiple PL statements. e.g. MERGE INTO target AS t USING source AS s ON t.tid = s.sid WHEN MATCHED AND t.balance > s.delta THEN UPDATE SET balance = t.balance - s.delta WHEN MATCHED THEN DELETE WHEN NOT MATCHED AND s.delta > 0 THEN INSERT VALUES (s.sid, s.delta) WHEN NOT MATCHED THEN DO NOTHING; MERGE works with regular and partitioned tables, including column and row security enforcement, as well as support for row, statement and transition triggers. MERGE is optimized for OLTP and is parameterizable, though also useful for large scale ETL/ELT. MERGE is not intended to be used in preference to existing single SQL commands for INSERT, UPDATE or DELETE since there is some overhead. MERGE can be used statically from PL/pgSQL. MERGE does not yet support inheritance, write rules, RETURNING clauses, updatable views or foreign tables. MERGE follows SQL Standard per the most recent SQL:2016. Includes full tests and documentation, including full isolation tests to demonstrate the concurrent behavior. This version written from scratch in 2017 by Simon Riggs, using docs and tests originally written in 2009. Later work from Pavan Deolasee has been both complex and deep, leaving the lead author credit now in his hands. Extensive discussion of concurrency from Peter Geoghegan, with thanks for the time and effort contributed. Various issues reported via sqlsmith by Andreas Seltenreich Authors: Pavan Deolasee, Simon Riggs Reviewers: Peter Geoghegan, Amit Langote, Tomas Vondra, Simon Riggs Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CANP8+jKitBSrB7oTgT9CY2i1ObfOt36z0XMraQc+Xrz8QB0nXA@mail.gmail.com https://postgr.es/m/CAH2-WzkJdBuxj9PO=2QaO9-3h3xGbQPZ34kJH=HukRekwM-GZg@mail.gmail.com
On 28th of March 2018, Andrew Dunstan committed patch:
Fast ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN with a non-NULL default Currently adding a column to a table with a non-NULL default results in a rewrite of the table. For large tables this can be both expensive and disruptive. This patch removes the need for the rewrite as long as the default value is not volatile. The default expression is evaluated at the time of the ALTER TABLE and the result stored in a new column (attmissingval) in pg_attribute, and a new column (atthasmissing) is set to true. Any existing row when fetched will be supplied with the attmissingval. New rows will have the supplied value or the default and so will never need the attmissingval. Any time the table is rewritten all the atthasmissing and attmissingval settings for the attributes are cleared, as they are no longer needed. The most visible code change from this is in heap_attisnull, which acquires a third TupleDesc argument, allowing it to detect a missing value if there is one. In many cases where it is known that there will not be any (e.g. catalog relations) NULL can be passed for this argument. Andrew Dunstan, heavily modified from an original patch from Serge Rielau. Reviewed by Tom Lane, Andres Freund, Tomas Vondra and David Rowley. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/-7002-4c27-59f5-@2ndQuadrant.com
Some time ago I wrote a site to paste SQL queries with reformatting/pretty-printing using pgFormatter library.
Today, I figured out that I should update the library since it has quite some changes recently, so it would be good to incorporate its fixes to paste site.
Unfortunately – new version is not backward compatible, and I currently have no time to figure out what has changed and how to work around it.
So – until I will have time to work on it, paste.depesz.com is no longer working. Sorry.
Couple of times, in various places, I was asked: what is the benefit from upgrading to some_version.
So far, I just read release docs, and compiled list of what has changed.
But this is not necessarily simple – consider upgrade from 9.3.2 to 10.2. That's a lot of changes.
So, to be able to answer these questions faster in future, I created a site: Why upgrade PostgreSQL?.
Usage should be simple – pick from which version you want to upgrade, to which version you want to upgrade, and press gives me… button.
Hope you'll find it useful.
I was faced with interesting problem. Which schema, in my DB, uses the most disk space? Theoretically it's trivial, we have set of helpful functions:
But in some cases it becomes more of a problem. For example – when you have thousands of tables …
On 7th of February 2018, Tom Lane committed patch:
Support all SQL:2011 options for window frame clauses. This patch adds the ability to use "RANGE offset PRECEDING/FOLLOWING" frame boundaries in window functions. We'd punted on that back in the original patch to add window functions, because it was not clear how to do it in a reasonably data-type-extensible fashion. That problem is resolved here by adding the ability for btree operator classes to provide an "in_range" support function that defines how to add or subtract the RANGE offset value. Factoring it this way also allows the operator class to avoid overflow problems near the ends of the datatype's range, if it wishes to expend effort on that. (In the committed patch, the integer opclasses handle that issue, but it did not seem worth the trouble to avoid overflow failures for datetime types.) The patch includes in_range support for the integer_ops opfamily (int2/int4/int8) as well as the standard datetime types. Support for other numeric types has been requested, but that seems like suitable material for a follow-on patch. In addition, the patch adds GROUPS mode which counts the offset in ORDER-BY peer groups rather than rows, and it adds the frame_exclusion options specified by SQL:2011. As far as I can see, we are now fully up to spec on window framing options. Existing behaviors remain unchanged, except that I changed the errcode for a couple of existing error reports to meet the SQL spec's expectation that negative "offset" values should be reported as SQLSTATE 22013. Internally and in relevant parts of the documentation, we now consistently use the terminology "offset PRECEDING/FOLLOWING" rather than "value PRECEDING/FOLLOWING", since the term "value" is confusingly vague. Oliver Ford, reviewed and whacked around some by me Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAGMVOdu9sivPAxbNN0X+q19Sfv9edEPv=HibOJhB14TJv_RCQg@mail.gmail.com
Support parallel btree index builds. To make this work, tuplesort.c and logtape.c must also support parallelism, so this patch adds that infrastructure and then applies it to the particular case of parallel btree index builds. Testing to date shows that this can often be 2-3x faster than a serial index build. The model for deciding how many workers to use is fairly primitive at present, but it's better than not having the feature. We can refine it as we get more experience. Peter Geoghegan with some help from Rushabh Lathia. While Heikki Linnakangas is not an author of this patch, he wrote other patches without which this feature would not have been possible, and therefore the release notes should possibly credit him as an author of this feature. Reviewed by Claudio Freire, Heikki Linnakangas, Thomas Munro, Tels, Amit Kapila, me. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAM3SWZQKM=Pzc=CAHzRixKjp2eO5Q0Jg1SoFQqeXFQ647JiwqQ@mail.gmail.com Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAH2-Wz=AxWqDoVvGU7dq856S4r6sJAj6DBn7VMtigkB33N5eyg@mail.gmail.com
Checked it and found couple of other omissions of the same kind with other Parallel* scans.
Fixed (I hope) all of them in:
The change is not really big, but just figured I'll let you know.
On 19th of January 2018, Robert Haas committed patch:
Allow UPDATE to move rows between partitions. When an UPDATE causes a row to no longer match the partition constraint, try to move it to a different partition where it does match the partition constraint. In essence, the UPDATE is split into a DELETE from the old partition and an INSERT into the new one. This can lead to surprising behavior in concurrency scenarios because EvalPlanQual rechecks won't work as they normally did; the known problems are documented. (There is a pending patch to improve the situation further, but it needs more review.) Amit Khandekar, reviewed and tested by Amit Langote, David Rowley, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Dilip Kumar, Amul Sul, Thomas Munro, Álvaro Herrera, Amit Kapila, and me. A few final revisions by me. Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAJ3gD9do9o2ccQ7j7+tSgiE1REY65XRiMb=yJO3u3QhyP8EEPQ@mail.gmail.com