Hello Bill,
You wrote that my testing methodology is flawed - I hope you are right!
However, I am a bit confused about your comments. Yes, I did edited the name
of the tables for clarity but if I miss the point I, I will do it again as I
am writing without modifying anything. Here is the
On 05/23/2015 02:42 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Adrian Klaver adrian.kla...@aklaver.com writes:
So on my Ubuntu installs it does not set up the postgres user to allow login,
so how are you getting to:
su postgres -c ...
From root, presumably ...
Aargh, so used to the little voice telling me not
Regards to all the list.
First all the info about the system:
O.S: CentOS 7 64 bits
PostgreSQL version:
SELECT version();
version
--
PostgreSQL 9.2.7 on x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu, compiled
Marcos Ortiz mlor...@uci.cu writes:
O.S: CentOS 7 64 bits
We are working here to integrate PostgreSQL with Neo4j through PL/Python
using the py2neo module for it, and when we want to send sentences to
Neo4j using port 7474, the executed code raises a SocketError [Errno 13]
Permission
On 05/23/2015 03:27 PM, Marcos Ortiz wrote:
Regards to all the list.
First all the info about the system:
O.S: CentOS 7 64 bits
PostgreSQL version:
SELECT version();
version
--
On 23/05/15 18:38, Tom Lane wrote:
Marcos Ortiz mlor...@uci.cu writes:
O.S: CentOS 7 64 bits
We are working here to integrate PostgreSQL with Neo4j through PL/Python
using the py2neo module for it, and when we want to send sentences to
Neo4j using port 7474, the executed code raises a
On 23/05/15 18:40, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 05/23/2015 03:27 PM, Marcos Ortiz wrote:
Regards to all the list.
First all the info about the system:
O.S: CentOS 7 64 bits
PostgreSQL version:
SELECT version();
version
Adrian Klaver adrian.kla...@aklaver.com writes:
So on my Ubuntu installs it does not set up the postgres user to allow login,
so how are you getting to:
su postgres -c ...
From root, presumably ...
I thought of a different theory: maybe the server's complaint is not due
to trying to read
Is it true that PG does not log undo information, only redo. If true,
then how does it bring a database back to consistent state during
crash recovery. Just curious.
thanks.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 1:34 PM, Ravi Krishna sravikrish...@gmail.com
wrote:
Is it true that PG does not log undo information, only redo. If true,
then how does it bring a database back to consistent state during
crash recovery. Just curious.
What does undo mean?
David J.
On 05/23/2015 08:06 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
twoflower standa.ku...@gmail.com writes:
So I wrote a few scripts to make my life easier, e.g. *pg94start.sh*:
su postgres -c /usr/lib/postgresql/9.4/bin/pg_ctl -D
/storage/postgresql/9.4/data -o '-c
config_file=/etc/postgresql/9.4/main/postgresql.conf'
On May 23, 2015 01:48:11 PM David G. Johnston wrote:
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 1:34 PM, Ravi Krishna sravikrish...@gmail.com
wrote:
Is it true that PG does not log undo information, only redo. If true,
then how does it bring a database back to consistent state during
crash recovery. Just
On 05/23/2015 08:23 AM, twoflower wrote:
Testing this, the problem appears to be that you forgot the keyword
start, so pg_ctl didn't really do anything.
I am sorry, that was just a mistake on my part here, it is in the script.
I suspect this was left over from some previous
Adrian Klaver adrian.kla...@aklaver.com writes:
On 05/23/2015 08:06 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
I can't explain that claim, but for me, -c config_file=something
seems to work as you'd expect, and a look at the server source
code confirms that it should honor that (cf SelectConfigFiles()).
I think the
I am working with postgresql 9.3 and I understand from the documentation that
constraint_exclusion is set to “partition” by default. Looking at my
postgres.conf file, the concerned line is “#constraint_exclusion = partition”.
Furthermore, the execution plan shows that constraint_exclusion
undo means that reading the WAL logs and able to rollback a row back
to its original state before the update. Typically it is used to
rollback a long running transaction which got aborted due to a crash.
Here is an example:
2.pm You kick off a huge transaction to update say 1 million rows.
On 05/23/2015 03:51 PM, Marcos Ortiz wrote:
On 23/05/15 18:40, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 05/23/2015 03:27 PM, Marcos Ortiz wrote:
Regards to all the list.
First all the info about the system:
O.S: CentOS 7 64 bits
PostgreSQL version:
SELECT version();
version
On 23/05/15 19:09, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 05/23/2015 03:51 PM, Marcos Ortiz wrote:
On 23/05/15 18:40, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 05/23/2015 03:27 PM, Marcos Ortiz wrote:
Regards to all the list.
First all the info about the system:
O.S: CentOS 7 64 bits
PostgreSQL version:
SELECT
On 05/23/2015 04:16 PM, Marcos Ortiz wrote:
On 23/05/15 19:09, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 05/23/2015 03:51 PM, Marcos Ortiz wrote:
On 23/05/15 18:40, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 05/23/2015 03:27 PM, Marcos Ortiz wrote:
Regards to all the list.
First all the info about the system:
O.S: CentOS 7
On Saturday, May 23, 2015, Daniel Begin jfd...@hotmail.com wrote:
I am working with postgresql 9.3 and I understand from the documentation
that constraint_exclusion is set to “partition” by default. Looking at my
postgres.conf file, the concerned line is “#constraint_exclusion =
partition”.
On 05/23/2015 04:16 PM, Marcos Ortiz wrote:
On 23/05/15 19:09, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 05/23/2015 03:51 PM, Marcos Ortiz wrote:
On 23/05/15 18:40, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 05/23/2015 03:27 PM, Marcos Ortiz wrote:
Regards to all the list.
First all the info about the system:
O.S: CentOS 7
On Saturday, May 23, 2015, Ravi Krishna sravikrish...@gmail.com wrote:
undo means that reading the WAL logs and able to rollback a row back
to its original state before the update. Typically it is used to
rollback a long running transaction which got aborted due to a crash.
Here is an
Oops, I was responding to the email below from melvin6925
From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of David G. Johnston
Sent: May-23-15 19:32
To: Daniel Begin
Cc: melvin6925; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] [NOVICE]
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Ravi Krishna sravikrish...@gmail.com wrote:
Is it true that PG does not log undo information, only redo. If true,
then how does it bring a database back to consistent state during
crash recovery. Just curious.
PostgreSQL is NOT oracle. And it doesn't work like
On Sat, 23 May 2015 18:16:43 -0400
Daniel Begin jfd...@hotmail.com wrote:
Hello Bill,
You wrote that my testing methodology is flawed - I hope you are right!
However, I am a bit confused about your comments. Yes, I did edited the name
of the tables for clarity but if I miss the point I,
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 6:57 PM, Bill Moran wmo...@potentialtech.com wrote:
On Fri, 22 May 2015 12:44:40 -0400
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Bill Moran wmo...@potentialtech.com writes:
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Other questions you'd have to think about: what is the data type
On 05/23/2015 07:01 AM, rob stone wrote:
On Sat, 2015-05-23 at 04:23 -0700, twoflower wrote:
I thought I understood how specifying a config file path for the
server works, but that's apparently not the case.
The cluster data is at /storage/postgresql/9.4/data.
The config files are at
I thought I understood how specifying a config file path for the server
works, but that's apparently not the case.
The cluster data is at */storage/postgresql/9.4/data*.
The config files are at */etc/postgresql/9.4/main* (this is the default
location on Ubuntu).
This is how the beginning of
Tom Lane wrote on 21.05.2015 19:57:
One large concern about doing anything like this is whether future
versions of the SQL standard might blindside us with some
not-terribly-compatible interpretation of that syntax. If we do something
that is also in Oracle or DB2 or one of the other big boys,
On 05/23/2015 04:23 AM, twoflower wrote:
I thought I understood how specifying a config file path for the server
works, but that's apparently not the case.
The cluster data is at */storage/postgresql/9.4/data*.
The config files are at */etc/postgresql/9.4/main* (this is the default
location on
On Sat, 2015-05-23 at 04:23 -0700, twoflower wrote:
I thought I understood how specifying a config file path for the
server works, but that's apparently not the case.
The cluster data is at /storage/postgresql/9.4/data.
The config files are at /etc/postgresql/9.4/main (this is the
Hi Daniel
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 7:21 PM, Daniel Begin jfd...@hotmail.com wrote:
I have split a large table (billions of records) into multiple partitions,
hoping the access would be faster. I used an ID to make partitions check
(check (id = 100 AND id 200)…) and created over 80 tables
Bill Moran wrote on 22.05.2015 18:57:
Arrgh ... it's good that you're bringing this up, but you're making me
realize that there's more to figure out than I originally thought ...
My focus had been on it being used for BYTEA columns, but there _are_
plenty of places in the code that do things
Thomas Kellerer spam_ea...@gmx.net writes:
The SQL standard already specifies the format for binary strings:
binary string literal ::=
X quote [ space... ] [ { hexit [ space... ] hexit [ space...
] }... ] quote
[ { separator quote [ space... ] [ { hexit [ space... ]
Testing this, the problem appears to be that you forgot the
keywordstart, so pg_ctl didn't really do anything.
I am sorry, that was just a mistake on my part here, it is in the script.
I suspect this was left over from some previous attempt.
It doesn't look like it. I tried several times,
twoflower standa.ku...@gmail.com writes:
So I wrote a few scripts to make my life easier, e.g. *pg94start.sh*:
su postgres -c /usr/lib/postgresql/9.4/bin/pg_ctl -D
/storage/postgresql/9.4/data -o '-c
config_file=/etc/postgresql/9.4/main/postgresql.conf'
But running this script did not work,
Thank you for the note Ian. I definitely see your point about the onus
being on the local database to maintain the definition of the remote
table. Do you or anyone have this list have any experience with the
resulting behavior if the definition of the enum were to become out of sync
between the
Peter Swartz peter.goodings.swa...@gmail.com writes:
suppose the foreign database adds a value to the enum, and the foreign
table now has rows with this new value, while the local definition of the
enum remains unchanged. Obviously, the appropriate action on my part is to
maintain consistency
A large portion of why you describe below is the exact opposite of my
own testing (unfortunately, I don't have the actual test results any
more because I did the tests for a former employer).
In my tests, single lookups against the same column being used to
partition improved performance in
Following Francisco suggestion, I was able to do some tests earlier this
morning when the partitioning process completed and all the resulting tables
analyzed.
Here is what I got on both the original table and its partitioned counterpart
while running the same queries. I tested them only for a
Did you remember to set constraint_exclusion = on and reload the .conf ?
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S® 6, an ATT 4G LTE smartphone Original
message
From: Daniel Begin jfd...@hotmail.com
Date: 05/23/2015 14:37 (GMT-05:00)
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re:
41 matches
Mail list logo
