Ron Johnson wrote:
Dinosaurist?
The big systems we use were last upgraded 5ish years ago, and are
scheduled (eventually) to be replaced with Oracle on Linux.
We've got some pretty new Alpha servers (around a year old) running VMS
8.3 which was released about the same time we got the
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruno
Wolff III
Sent: vrijdag 11 mei 2007 21:18
To: John Gateley
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Fault Tolerant Postgresql (two
machines, two postmasters, one disk array)
On Thu,
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 04:07:10PM -0400, Jasbinder Singh Bali wrote:
I have a transaction in postgres database as follows:
1 Insert in table xyz
2 trigger fired on table xyz after insert
3 Trigger calls a function func
4 func is an implementation of a client socket in perl
1-4 happens
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/11/07 21:35, Dhaval Shah wrote:
I do care about the following:
1. Basic type checking
2. Knowing failed inserts.
3. Non-corruption
4. Macro transactions. That is a minimal read consistency.
The following is not necessary
1.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/12/07 01:51, Paul Lambert wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
Dinosaurist?
The big systems we use were last upgraded 5ish years ago, and are
scheduled (eventually) to be replaced with Oracle on Linux.
We've got some pretty new Alpha servers
Ron Johnson wrote:
On 05/12/07 01:51, Paul Lambert wrote:
Sure it's been around nearly since the dawn of time, but it's still an
actively developed operating system.
I've finally got my Alpha server at home up and running now too, and I
What are you running?
Off hand I couldn't tell you -
I'm trying to upgrade from 8.1 to 8.2.
Apparently the upgrade I just ran through installed a second database
on my server.
I was hoping that the debian configuration would migrate this for me.
I recall there was once a time when it would ask you about moving
data from old to new databases.
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 09:36:45AM -0400, Tom Allison wrote:
Meanwhile, can I just use pg_dumpall to pull from 8.1 and then reload
into 8.2?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.FAQ.html#item3.6
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to
OK, after reviewing many emails and what I was trying to do I
upgraded from 8.2.
Seems to work as it did in 8.1 which is a good start.
I'm doing all of this so I can use the 'values' that was described
as being something like:
select * from (values ('one','two','three')) foo;
But
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 09:36:45AM -0400, Tom Allison wrote:
I'm trying to upgrade from 8.1 to 8.2.
Apparently the upgrade I just ran through installed a second database
on my server.
I was hoping that the debian configuration would migrate this for me.
I recall there was once a time
Tom Allison [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK, after reviewing many emails and what I was trying to do I upgraded from
8.2.
Seems to work as it did in 8.1 which is a good start.
I'm doing all of this so I can use the 'values' that was described as being
something like:
select * from
This is getting really ugly...
it won't finish in less than .. minutes.
spam= explain select u2.token_idx, t.token_idx, foo.token from
tokens t left outer join user_token u1 using (token_idx),
users u left outer join user_token u2 using (user_idx),
(values('one'),('want'),('examine'),('three'))
At 04:43 AM 5/12/2007, Dhaval Shah wrote:
1. Large amount of streamed rows. In the order of @50-100k rows per
second. I was thinking that the rows can be stored into a file and the
file then copied into a temp table using copy and then appending those
rows to the master table. And then dropping
--- Tom Allison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is getting really ugly...
it won't finish in less than .. minutes.
spam= explain select u2.token_idx, t.token_idx, foo.token from
tokens t left outer join user_token u1 using (token_idx),
users u left outer join user_token u2 using (user_idx),
could you please elaborate this concept of queue table?
~Jas
On 5/12/07, Martijn van Oosterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 04:07:10PM -0400, Jasbinder Singh Bali wrote:
I have a transaction in postgres database as follows:
1 Insert in table xyz
2 trigger fired on
Hi,
I'm trying to split a table into 2 partitions based on whether a field's value is NULL or NOT NULL, but when I run
EXPLAIN SELECT * FROM tab WHERE version IS NULL it shows that both partitions are being scanned, not just the one
which contains rows where version is null.
Is this not
I agree I'm going in the wrong direction.
in a Venn sort of way, what I'm trying to do is:
values(...) -- left outer -- tokens -- left outer -- (user_tokens
where user_tokens.user_idx = users.user_idx and users.user_idx = 4)
To give me a list of
all values || any matching token || any
Tom Allison [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is getting really ugly...
it won't finish in less than .. minutes.
spam= explain select u2.token_idx, t.token_idx, foo.token from
tokens t left outer join user_token u1 using (token_idx),
users u left outer join user_token u2 using (user_idx),
I've changed:
#ifdef PG_MODULE_MAGIC
PG_MODULE_MAGIC;
#endif
to:
#define PG_MODULE_MAGIC ;
and the .so does compile, but the database is still reporting the same
error when i try to CREATE FUNCTION:
ERROR: incompatible library /home/mario/tests/psql_c_func/
test_func.so: missing magic block
On May 10, 6:02 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (garry saddington)
wrote:
Does anyone know of a tool that will generate a postgres database schema
given an xml schema(xsd). Have triedxmlspywhich says it does so but it
only has limited postgres support and then it crashes.
regards
Garry
Hello
I have two tables -- A and B. The structure of both is the same. Only,
B has many indexes and is used for heavy duty SELECTs. On the other
hand, A only accepts heavy duty INSERTs, so has only one primary key
index.
So my DB design is such that A is only an INSERT table. Periodically,
say
Aleksander Kmetec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm trying to split a table into 2 partitions based on whether a field's
value is NULL or NOT NULL, but when I run
EXPLAIN SELECT * FROM tab WHERE version IS NULL it shows that both
partitions are being scanned, not just the one
which contains
Mario Munda [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've changed:
#ifdef PG_MODULE_MAGIC
PG_MODULE_MAGIC;
#endif
to:
#define PG_MODULE_MAGIC ;
Uh, that turns it into a complete no-op. It should just be
PG_MODULE_MAGIC;
If you tried that and it didn't compile, that's proof that you're using
pre-8.2
Thank you very much for all your help!!!
Solved this one rather nicely:
my $glue = q{'),(E'};
my $string = (E' . join($glue, map{quotemeta } @$tokens) . ');
my $sql =SQL;
SELECT values.token, t.token_idx, ut.token_idx
FROM
(values TOKEN_LIST_STRING) as values(token)
left outer join tokens
I think I fixed the rest of my sql statements with the following:
insert into tokens (token)select values.token
from (values TOKEN_LIST_STRING ) as values(token)
left outer join tokens t using (token)
where t.token_idx is null
insert into user_token(user_idx, token_idx)select $self-{user_idx},
This database is working GREAT!!!
I noticed that under 8.2 the autovacuum isn't running (logging) every
60s like I'm used to seeing.
I pretty much just took the defaults in the postgresql.conf file
since that's always seemed to work before.
I'm not making a lot of changes to the database
I'm trying to upgrade a pretty big database (60G) from postgres 8.0 to
postgres 8.2 on windows 2000 Server (both version running on the same machine
on different ports). During the migration process, I always get an error at
some point (never the same) :
LOG: could not
On Wednesday 09 May 2007 04:49, Louis-David Mitterrand wrote:
I'm trying to implement a forum with mason and postgresql. What is the
typical database schema of a forum (threaded or flat) application?
Try downloading and installing a few free forum packages:
phpbb
phorum
bugzilla
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 04:58:28PM +0300, Sorin N. Ciolofan wrote:
I increased significantly the number of shared buffers from 3000 to 100 000
(80Mb)
BTW, 100,000 shared buffers is actually 800MB, not 80.
--
Jim Nasby[EMAIL PROTECTED]
EnterpriseDB
Consolidating my responses in one email.
1. The total data that is expected is some 1 - 1.5 Tb a day. 75% of
the data comes in a period of 10 hours. Rest 25% comes in the 14
hours. Of course there are ways to smooth the load patterns, however
the current scenario is as explained.
2 I do expect
At 8:49p on 12 May 2007, Dhaval Shah wrote:
That leads to the question, can the data be compressed? Since the data
is very similar, any compression would result in some 6x-10x
compression. Is there a way to identify which partitions are in which
data files and compress them until they are
31 matches
Mail list logo
