On 2013-02-06, Bèrto ëd Sèra berto.d.s...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
You've hidden nothing from INSERT-RETURNING.
?? Or from a select, if the final value is what you mean. What we hide
is the way values are made, clearly not the final value. That bit is
accessible to anyone who can select the
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Jasen Betts ja...@xnet.co.nz wrote:
On 2013-02-06, Bèrto ëd Sèra berto.d.s...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
You've hidden nothing from INSERT-RETURNING.
?? Or from a select, if the final value is what you mean. What we hide
is the way values are made, clearly not the
Thanks Tom,
On 2013-02-06, at 13:42 , Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
The only part of this query that looks like it could possibly produce
that error is the res8.resultvalue-to-int cast:
LEFT JOIN results res8 ON res8.reportid = rep.id AND res8.resulttypeid = 108
AND res8.del = false
Hello,
I've read in the docs, that every table should
better have primary key and so I've rearranged
my 8.4.13 database: added primary keys to
each table (some of the primary keys are
pairs of columns) and dropped all other indices.
And I've probably dropped few indices too many,
because a
Hello
2013/2/6 Alexander Farber alexander.far...@gmail.com:
Hello,
I've read in the docs, that every table should
better have primary key and so I've rearranged
my 8.4.13 database: added primary keys to
each table (some of the primary keys are
pairs of columns) and dropped all other
On 6 February 2013 11:03, Alexander Farber alexander.far...@gmail.comwrote:
begin
insert into pref_ban2 select
id,
first_name,
last_name,
city,
Hi there
I'm trying to get my head around WAL and checkpoints and need to ask a couple
of questions before I get a headache.
Firstly, I see the terms WAL log, WAL file and transaction log all over
the place - are these the same thing (i.e. files in the pg_xlog directory)?
I'm a bit confused
Hi
I still don't see how that's any better than a stored procedure that
directly does the INSERT. You can conceal the code every bit as
easily.
Guys I DO NOT write the customers' security guidelines. I get asked to
produce a design in which party X will make plain INSERTs and ignore
the very
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Bèrto ëd Sèra berto.d.s...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
I still don't see how that's any better than a stored procedure that
directly does the INSERT. You can conceal the code every bit as
easily.
Guys I DO NOT write the customers' security guidelines. I get asked to
drew_hunt wrote:
I'm trying to get my head around WAL and checkpoints and need to ask a couple
of questions before I
get a headache.
Firstly, I see the terms WAL log, WAL file and transaction log all over
the place - are these
the same thing (i.e. files in the pg_xlog directory)?
On 6 February 2013 12:56, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
If you get into a taxi and ask
to be driven to New Zealand within the hour, no amount of begging will
get you what you want.
...Unless you get into a taxi in New Zealand.
--
If you can't see the forest for the trees,
Cut the
Perfect, that is exactly what I needed. Thanks David!
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 6:49 PM, David Johnston pol...@yahoo.com wrote:
Moshe Jacobson wrote
I'm
unsure of the syntax for passing in values from columns in the database
as
the parameters of a set-returning function from which I want
On 02/06/2013 01:28 AM, Ben Madin wrote:
Thanks Tom,
On 2013-02-06, at 13:42 , Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
The only part of this query that looks like it could possibly produce
that error is the res8.resultvalue-to-int cast:
LEFT JOIN results res8 ON res8.reportid = rep.id AND
Ben Madin b...@ausvet.com.au writes:
On 2013-02-06, at 13:42 , Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
The only part of this query that looks like it could possibly produce
that error is the res8.resultvalue-to-int cast:
LEFT JOIN results res8 ON res8.reportid = rep.id AND res8.resulttypeid =
On Feb 6, 2013, at 8:14 AM, Roberto Scattini roberto.scatt...@gmail.com wrote:
hi list,
we have two new dell poweredge r720. based on recommendations from this list
we have configued the five disks in raid10 + 1 hot spare.
You might mention a bit more about how your drives are configured.
On Feb 6, 2013, at 9:55 AM, Roberto Scattini roberto.scatt...@gmail.com wrote:
hi steven,
we have two new dell poweredge r720. based on recommendations from this
list we have configued the five disks in raid10 + 1 hot spare.
You might mention a bit more about how your drives are
Timezone configuration parameter (defaulting to system timezone) worked fine
for us before upgrading from 8.4. to 9.2.
Now we've got a problem.
9.2 Release Notes says:
* Identify the server time zone during initdb, and set postgresql.conf entries
I have a wide-ish table with 60 columns. I want to make a copy of data
whenever a record is updated or deleted.
Right now I have a table that's almost identical but with a 'created'
column (timestamp) and an 'action' column (which gets TG_OP for UPDATE or
DELETE).
My idea would be to sort on the
See the archived thread here:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAEghcWD8DXjroBYCZsdGrx+cHTCbCbW9es2uQ+o7a8NZ61JT=q...@mail.gmail.com
Short version: Sorry, but you're going to need to recompile if you want
that behavior. Here's a diff applied against 9.2.1
http://pastebin.com/5AyaX2RF. I've
Terence,
Thanks for quick reply, I read your thread (Dec, 2012) before posting my
question.
But, recompile is not an option for me. Was hoping, that something regarding
this issue changed since...
Igor Neyman
From: Terence Ferraro [mailto:terencejferr...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Wells Oliver wellsoli...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a wide-ish table with 60 columns. I want to make a copy of data
whenever a record is updated or deleted.
Right now I have a table that's almost identical but with a 'created' column
(timestamp) and an 'action'
I don't mean to hog my own thread, but the more I look at the hstore type,
the more reasonable it seems. The table is just a serial, a timestamp, and
two columns 'old' and 'new'. The trigger function inserts these values
using hstore(OLD) and hstore(NEW).
Then, you can select old, new, and new -
On Wednesday, February 6, 2013 at 23:31,
00jkxma...@sneakemail.com (Alban Hertroys haramrae-at-gmail.com
|pg-gts/Basic|) wrote:
On 6 February 2013 12:56, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
If you get into a taxi and ask
to be driven to New Zealand within the hour, no amount of begging
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Wells Oliver wellsoli...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't mean to hog my own thread, but the more I look at the hstore type,
the more reasonable it seems. The table is just a serial, a timestamp, and
two columns 'old' and 'new'. The trigger function inserts these values
Sorry, but from what I understand the change is permanent. If recompile is
not an option but you're on Windows let me know; I do have binaries
available..
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Igor Neyman iney...@perceptron.com wrote:
Terence,
** **
Thanks for quick reply, I read your thread
I am on Windows (both 32 and 64 bit) using 32-bit Postgres.
So, your binaries are for 9.2.1, you aren't planning to go to 9.2.2?
From: Terence Ferraro [mailto:terencejferr...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 3:07 PM
To: Igor Neyman
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re:
On 02/06/2013 10:32 AM, Igor Neyman wrote:
Timezone configuration parameter (defaulting to system timezone) worked
fine for us before upgrading from 8.4. to 9.2.
Now we’ve got a problem.
9.2 Release Notes says:
· Identify the server time zone during initdb, and set postgresql.conf
entries
-Original Message-
From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.kla...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 4:40 PM
To: Igor Neyman
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] configuring timezone
On 02/06/2013 10:32 AM, Igor Neyman wrote:
Timezone configuration
On 02/06/2013 01:47 PM, Igor Neyman wrote:
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.kla...@gmail.com
Sometimes, but not always.
I guess you could ship a script that sets the timezone
when the server is installed.
Going back to the reason for this change in Release Notes:
This avoids expensive
Igor Neyman iney...@perceptron.com writes:
Going back to the reason for this change in Release Notes:
This avoids expensive time zone probes during server start.
How expensive?
The time zone probe logic involves reading every file under
/usr/share/zoneinfo (or wherever you have the Olson tz
9.2.1 was the version standard when I was building and deploying...so no, I
probably will not (personally) be updating anytime soon...
However, if you're interested, I'll see if I can find a place tonight or
tomorrow to put these binaries (they are 32-bit as well), source, etc
(sourceforge
Thank you for explaining.
Regards,
Igor Neyman
From: Tom Lane [t...@sss.pgh.pa.us]
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 5:11 PM
To: Igor Neyman
Cc: Adrian Klaver; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] configuring timezone
Igor Neyman
Removing -hackers and adding -general
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Miroslav Šimulčík
simulcik.m...@gmail.comwrote:
Alternately, you might be able to use a custom GUC from a rather smaller
PL/PgSQL function. At transaction start, issue:
set_config('myapp.trigger_time', '', 't');
Hi Hari,
Thanks for the tip. We tried applying that patch, however the error recurred
exactly as before.
Regards // Mike
-Original Message-
From: Hari Babu [mailto:haribabu.ko...@huawei.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 5 February 2013 10:07 PM
To: Michael Harris; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
maybe pg_basebackup can`t handle such big database.try
rsync,pg_start_backup,rsync,pg_stop_backup,it always works fine for us.our
instance is about 2TB and we use pg9.1.x.
jov
在 2013-2-7 下午2:25，Michael Harris michael.har...@ericsson.com写道：
Hi Hari,
Thanks for the tip. We tried applying that
We are hitting a situation where REINDEX is resulting in postgresql to go
to dead lock state* for ever*. On debugging the issue we found that
3 connections are going in to some dead lock state.
1. *idle in transaction *
2. *REINDEX waiting *
3. *SELECT waiting*
All these
Nice. This solves problem with clearing of session variables. Thank you
Miro
2013/2/7 Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im
Removing -hackers and adding -general
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Miroslav Šimulčík simulcik.m...@gmail.com
wrote:
Alternately, you might be able to use a custom
Gavan Schneider wrote:
Taking a different tangent ...
Good idea.
Is there anything in the SQL standards about NOT NULL
constraints being deferrable?
To my mind we should not consider implementing non-standard
behaviour, but if something is in the standard I can't see why
it shouldn't be
Thank you to all for your help on this problem. I've summarised the resolution
in the hope that it might help someone else.
With all the advice I have gone forward and discovered that the issue related
to a postcode anomaly. A client had provided a new postbox postcode (the
application
Anoop K wrote:
We are hitting a situation where REINDEX is resulting in postgresql to go to
dead lock state for ever.
On debugging the issue we found that
3 connections are going in to some dead lock state.
1.idle in transaction
2.REINDEX waiting
3.SELECT waiting
All these
40 matches
Mail list logo
