Re: [GENERAL] Difficulty modelling sales taxes

2017-01-02 Thread amul sul
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Frank Millman wrote: > Hi all > > It is a bit ugly, because I have to use the ‘NVARCHAR code’ column from > tax_codes, not the primary key, but I think it would work. > NVARCHAR ? Are you using PostgreSQL as database server? Regards, Amul --

Re: [GENERAL] Exclude pg_largeobject form pg_dump

2016-11-07 Thread amul sul
it back to TRUE: > > +if (dopt.include_everything && !dopt.schemaOnly && !dopt.outputBlobs) > dopt.outputBlobs = true; > > > ...making it impossible to turn off dumping of blobs. > Yes, thats the reason v4 patch was not as expected. Regards, Amul Sul --

Re: [GENERAL] checkpoint_timout with no WAL activity

2016-11-07 Thread amul sul
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Tom DalPozzo wrote: > Hi, > I have: > checkpoint_timeout = 2min > wal_level = archive > archive_mode=on > archive_timeout = 30 > > With NO dbase activity, I see the WAL being modified every 2min (and, > consequently, one WAL file archived

Re: [GENERAL] Exclude pg_largeobject form pg_dump

2016-11-06 Thread amul sul
both -t and -T are given, the behavior 571 is to dump just the tables that match at least one -t 572 switch but no -T switches. If -T appears 573 without -t, then tables matching -T are 574 excluded from what is otherwise a normal dump. 575 576

Re: [GENERAL] Exclude pg_largeobject form pg_dump

2016-11-04 Thread amul sul
ON EXTENSION, .., etc) that what we don't want, right? #2 : We should add note for default behaviour if --no-blobs & --blobs both are specified. Regards, Amul Sul -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql

Re: [GENERAL] Exclude pg_largeobject form pg_dump

2016-11-03 Thread amul sul
Hi Guillaume, With your v2 patch, -B options working as expected but --no-blobs options is still unrecognized, this happens is because of you have forgot to add entry for 'no-blobs' in long_options[] array. Apart from this concern patch looks good to me. Thanks Regards, Amul The new status of

Re: [GENERAL] Database fixed size

2016-09-28 Thread amul sul
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Adir Shaban wrote: > Hey, > > Is there anyway to limit a database size? Nope. check this https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/619537.42270.qm%40web53708.mail.re2.yahoo.com thread. Regards, Amul -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list

Re: [GENERAL] Transactions and functions

2016-09-25 Thread amul sul
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 9:14 PM, Арсен Арутюнян wrote: > would you like to help me with several questions: > 1)are all functions atomic? Yes, of course. > 2)are they execute in a single query? Same as executing n-number of SQL statements between BEGIN-COMMIT block. Regards,

Re: [GENERAL] overwrite column data select - Postgres 9.2

2016-09-20 Thread amul sul
​First try to get backup using pg_dump & replace all data in email column. Restore table backup once you done with your testing. Regards, Amul. On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Patrick B wrote: > Hi guys, > > I've got a table with email column: > >> email CHARACTER

Re: [GENERAL] Restricted access on DataBases

2016-09-05 Thread amul sul
I think, it worth to try pg_hba.conf configuration[1]. [1]. https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/auth-pg-hba-conf.html Regards, Amul Sul On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 6:15 PM, Durumdara <durumd...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear PG-masters! > > We want to put more database