Not sure windows,on linux,you can use pg_upgrade hardlink mode and use
rsync to achieve this. See 9.6 pg_upgrade doc for detail.
Jov
2017年7月26日 5:50 AM,"Amee Sankhesara - Quipment India" <
amee.sankhes...@quipment.nl>写道:
> [image: Quipment Logo]
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> We have a windows setup where
[Quipment Logo]
Hello,
We have a windows setup where we have 2 node primary-slave setup which
comprises Async Replication + Log Shipping on slave.
Now we want to upgrade it from 9.4 to 9.6 version.
Do we need to upgrade slave to 9.6, upgrade master to 9.6 and setup replication
again from
On Tue, 2017-07-25 at 11:32 +0200, Adam Šlachta wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In short: Is there any way how to setup PostgreSql 9.6 to always
> start a transaction in WRITE mode?
>
> Our related configuration:
> "default_transaction_isolation" --> "read committed"
> "default_transaction_read_only"
Adam Šlachta writes:
> Hello Scott and other potential readers/writers,
>
>
>
>> Login to the database with psql as the same user that your java app
> connects with try:
>
>>
>
>> show default_transaction_read_only;
>
>> This can be set per-user, it's possible you're
Hi All,
I am facing below error while parsing log file.
[postgres@abc pgaudit]$ pgbadger -f stderr postgres-2017-07-25_121445.csv
Can't locate Text/CSV_XS.pm in @INC (@INC contains: /usr/local/lib64/perl5
/usr/local/share/perl5 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl
/usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl
Hello Scott and other potential readers/writers,
> Login to the database with psql as the same user that your java app connects
> with try:
>
> show default_transaction_read_only;
> This can be set per-user, it's possible you're getting tripped up there.
show default_transaction_read_only;
We understand the constraints exclusion will work only on constant values.
But in our case we will never pass a constant value to the partitioning key
when we query the partition tables. Will the partition be beneficial in
this case. If yes, can you please explain.
Thanks
On 25-Jul-2017 6:46 PM,
On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 06:21:43PM +0530, Krithika Venkatesh wrote:
> I have a table that is partitioned on a numeric column (ID).
>
> Partitioning works when I query the table with no joins.
>
> SELECT * FROM TABLE A a WHERE ID IN (SELECT ID FROM TABLE B b WHERE
> CREATED_TS =
Hi,
I have a table that is partitioned on a numeric column (ID).
Partitioning works when I query the table with no joins.
SELECT * FROM TABLE A a WHERE ID IN (SELECT ID FROM TABLE B b WHERE
CREATED_TS = CURRENT_TIMESTAMP)
Partitioning doesn't work when I do join.
SELECT A.* FROM TABLE A a
On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 5:32 AM, Adam Šlachta
wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
>
> In short: Is there any way how to setup PostgreSql 9.6 to always start a
> transaction in WRITE mode?
>
>
>
> Our related configuration:
>
> "default_transaction_isolation" --> "read committed"
>
>
On 2017-07-25 11:40, Thomas Güttler wrote:
I would like to reduce the "ifing and elsing" in my python code (less
conditions, less bugs, more SQL, more performance)
Regards,
Thomas Güttler
A quick brainstorm:
You could, probably...
but you'd have to create a separate database user for
>How could an application which gets written from scratch use PostgreSQL to
>implement
>row based permissions?
Are you looking for this?
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/ddl-rowsecurity.html
Regards
Daniel
I am thinking about rewriting an existing application which uses PostgreSQL via Django (ORM and Web-Framework written in
Python).
Up to now the permission checks are done at the application level.
Up to now queries like: "Show all items which the current user is allowed to
modify" result in
Hello,
In short: Is there any way how to setup PostgreSql 9.6 to always start a
transaction in WRITE mode?
Our related configuration:
"default_transaction_isolation" --> "read committed"
"default_transaction_read_only" --> "off"
Longer description (for those who are interested, since it
On 25.07.2017 05:50, Jeff Janes wrote:
It isn't either-or. It is the processing of millions of rows over the
large in-list which is taking the time. Processing an in-list as a
hash table would be great, but no one has gotten around to it
implementing it yet. Maybe Dmitry will be the one to
15 matches
Mail list logo