-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi list,
I've asked this question already on the PostGIS list, but I think it
might get great answers here too. I'm running two database cluster
with PostGIS 1.5 and PostgreSQL 9.1 on FreeBSD 9.2-RELEASE-p3 and
apparently my PostGIS and PostgreSQL
Hi Adrian,
it is not an artifact. This log comes from a multiplayer game, and this is
an specific test to replicate the error. Practically, there are two users
that execute the same operation, so you can see the simultaneous selects.
My opinion was every session was isolated from others and
On 02/06/2014 04:16 AM, Michael Sacket wrote:
Often times I find it necessary to work with table rows in a specific,
generally user-supplied order. It could be anything really that
requires an ordering that can't come from a natural column. Most of
the time this involved manipulating a
On 02/06/2014 06:51 AM, Torsten Förtsch wrote:
On 06/02/14 06:46, Torsten Förtsch wrote:
we decreased wal_keep_segments quite a lot. What is the supposed way to
get rid of the now superfluous files in pg_xlog?
Nothing special. The database did it for me.
It cleans up after a checkpoint. If
@mephysto I think you are trying to solve the wrong type of problem. Creation
of tables (temporary or not) are not supposed to run concurrently. So, this
is not an issue of PostgreSQL but design. There are two ways to solve the
problem.
a) You could use the sessionID (provided The Glassfish
Hey,
I dont understand the difference between this ORDINALITY option and
adding a row_number() over() in the SELECT.
Thanks,
Cheers,
Remi-C
2014-02-06 Vik Fearing vik.fear...@dalibo.com:
On 02/06/2014 04:16 AM, Michael Sacket wrote:
Often times I find it necessary to work with table rows
I would use normal pg_dump and pg_restore for the DBs and not
utils/postgis_restore.pl. Also, AFTER I backup all databases and everything
else, you could try to upgrade Postgis without upgrading PostgreSQL by
buliding from source e.g.
On my private computer I upgraded first the postgres to 9.3, then upgraded
postgis.
Sadly according to
http://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/wiki/UsersWikiPostgreSQLPostGIS ,
postgis 1.5 is not compatible with postgres 9.3.
However POstgis 2.1 is compatible with you current postgres option.
So as
On 02/06/2014 10:00 AM, Rémi Cura wrote:
Hey,
I dont understand the difference between this ORDINALITY option and
adding a row_number() over() in the SELECT.
WITH ORDINALITY will give you something to order by. You should never
do row_number() over () because that will give you potentially
I don't need local sorting, I only had to retrieve some objects from db
belongs to user.
A this point is it better unlogged tables or postgres object arrays?
Il 06/feb/2014 09:35 alexandros_e [via PostgreSQL]
ml-node+s1045698n5790806...@n5.nabble.com ha scritto:
@mephysto I think you are
On 02/05/2014 11:43 PM, 坂本 翼 wrote:
Hi all,
When I tried to psql command, I found that the result of command seems to be
different from explanation of the manual. Please tell me which is
correct performance, the result of command or the explanation of manual.
I show the details as follows.
On 02/06/2014 12:09 AM, mephysto wrote:
Hi Adrian,
it is not an artifact. This log comes from a multiplayer game, and this
is an specific test to replicate the error. Practically, there are two
users that execute the same operation, so you can see the simultaneous
selects.
My opinion was every
Ok, thanks ^^
Cheers,
Rémi-C
2014-02-06 Vik Fearing vik.fear...@dalibo.com:
On 02/06/2014 10:00 AM, Rémi Cura wrote:
Hey,
I dont understand the difference between this ORDINALITY option and
adding a row_number() over() in the SELECT.
WITH ORDINALITY will give you something to order
We have an OLTP database and no data warehouse. We are currently
planning out a build for a data warehouse however (possibly using
Hadoop). X is recommending that we convert our current, normalized
OLTP database into a flattened Star Schema.
The primary rationale for this OLTP flattening is that
Dear all, I need your advise. Found a tricky situation.
Without any changes in the configuration files, a **local** connection
to a local VPN IP address could not be established with the following error:
2014-02-05 09:12:21.111 - x - org.postgresql.util.PSQLException:
ERROR: could not
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 10:06 PM, Roy Anderson roy.ander...@gmail.com wrote:
We have an OLTP database and no data warehouse. We are currently
planning out a build for a data warehouse however (possibly using
Hadoop). X is recommending that we convert our current, normalized
OLTP database into a
I wanted to ask you the following question to all experts here.
Let's say I have this table foo
ID|G1|T1|
1|2|ABC|
1|2|ABCD|
1|2|DEF|
1|2|DEFG|
SELECT * FROM foo
GROUP BY ID,G1,T1
RETURNS exactly the same table.
Is there a way in SQL or PostgreSQL in general to group by values than are
not
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 5:21 AM, Edson Richter edsonrich...@hotmail.com wrote:
Dear all, I need your advise. Found a tricky situation.
Without any changes in the configuration files, a **local** connection to a
local VPN IP address could not be established with the following error:
2014-02-05
alexandros_e alexandros...@gmail.com writes:
Is there a way in SQL or PostgreSQL in general to group by values than are
not exactly the same but are quite similar (like 'ABC' and 'ABCD') based on
some distance function (levenshtein for example) if the distance is within
some threshold (i.e.,
On 02/06/2014 07:29 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
The log is telling you exactly what's happening. pg_hba.conf is a
database firewall of sorts that manages whom is allowed to connect to
the database and from where. Fixing this is a matter of adding a rule
to that file. The file is internally
On 6 February 2014 16:18, alexandros_e alexandros...@gmail.com wrote:
Let's say I have this table foo
ID|G1|T1|
1|2|ABC|
1|2|ABCD|
1|2|DEF|
1|2|DEFG|
SELECT * FROM foo
GROUP BY ID,G1,T1
Is there a way in SQL or PostgreSQL in general to group by values than are
not exactly the same but
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 7:41 AM, Alban Hertroys haram...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6 February 2014 16:18, alexandros_e alexandros...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there a way in SQL or PostgreSQL in general to group by values than are
not exactly the same but are quite similar (like 'ABC' and 'ABCD') based on
What about a regexp match ?
-Original Message-
From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Tom Lane
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 10:32 AM
To: alexandros_e
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Postgresql GROUP
You checked pg_hba_conf for host 10.68.73.6?
Is there a matching log entry for the rejection?
On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 09:21 -0200, Edson Richter wrote:
Dear all, I need your advise. Found a tricky situation.
Without any changes in the configuration files, a **local** connection
to a local
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 7:16 PM, Michael Sacket msac...@gammastream.com wrote:
Often times I find it necessary to work with table rows in a specific,
generally user-supplied order. It could be anything really that requires an
ordering that can't come from a natural column. Most of the time
Conceptually, Tom (as always) is right. But Alban's hack help.
DROP TABLE foo;
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS foo(ID INTEGER,G1 INTEGER, T1 TEXT, ID2 SERIAL
PRIMARY KEY);
INSERT INTO foo(ID,G1,T1) VALUES(1,2,'ABC');
INSERT INTO foo(ID,G1,T1) VALUES(1,2,'ABCD');
INSERT INTO foo(ID,G1,T1)
On Feb 6, 2014, at 2:23 AM, Vik Fearing wrote:
On 02/06/2014 04:16 AM, Michael Sacket wrote:
Often times I find it necessary to work with table rows in a specific,
generally user-supplied order. It could be anything really that requires an
ordering that can't come from a natural column.
I have reviewed working with dates documentation but some things are not
clear and I cannot get an example to work for what I need.
I am passing a date into a stored function like '2013-04-01'
The stored function accepts this string as a date type.
Within the function, I need to:
1. subtract
On 02/06/2014 09:25 AM, Jay Vee wrote:
I have reviewed working with dates documentation but some things are not
clear and I cannot get an example to work for what I need.
I am passing a date into a stored function like '2013-04-01'
The stored function accepts this string as a date type.
On 02/06/2014 09:25 AM, Jay Vee wrote:
I have reviewed working with dates documentation but some things are
not clear and I cannot get an example to work for what I need.
I am passing a date into a stored function like '2013-04-01'
The stored function accepts this string as a date type.
I tried that but get an error
v_start_date date;
v_minus_one_year date;
I have v_start_date to start with and want to subtract one year and put
into v_minus_one_year
select v_start_date - interval '1 yr' as v_minus_one_year;
--- I get:
ERROR: query has no destination for result
Jay Vee jvsr...@gmail.com writes:
I tried that but get an error
? ? v_start_date date;
? ? v_minus_one_year date;
I have v_start_date to start with and want to subtract one year and put into
v_minus_one_year
??
? select v_start_date - interval '1 yr' as v_minus_one_year;
sj$ cat q
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
*) Do not consider any advice to implement exotic storage backend from
someone that has not previously implemented that same technology on a
similar scale on a previous project, ever. Data of large scale is
hard.
On 07/02/14 05:43, Michael Sacket wrote:
On Feb 6, 2014, at 2:23 AM, Vik Fearing wrote:
On 02/06/2014 04:16 AM, Michael Sacket wrote:
Often times I find it necessary to work with table rows in a specific,
generally user-supplied order. It could be anything really that requires an
ordering
On 02/06/2014 11:57 AM, Gavin Flower wrote:
On 07/02/14 05:43, Michael Sacket wrote:
On Feb 6, 2014, at 2:23 AM, Vik Fearing wrote:
On 02/06/2014 04:16 AM, Michael Sacket wrote:
Often times I find it necessary to work with table rows in a
specific, generally user-supplied order. It could be
I've been plagued several times by NOT DEFERRABLE constraints. Is there
any good reason to define a constraint as NOT DEFERRABLE rather
than DEFERRABLE INITIALLY IMMEDIATE? For example, is there performance
penalty for PostgreSQL being prepared to defer a constraint even though it
is not
Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com writes:
I've been plagued several times by NOT DEFERRABLE constraints. Is there
any good reason to define a constraint as NOT DEFERRABLE rather
than DEFERRABLE INITIALLY IMMEDIATE? For example, is there performance
penalty for PostgreSQL being prepared to
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Merlin Moncure mmonc...@gmail.com wrote:
*) Do not consider any advice to implement exotic storage backend from
someone that has not previously implemented that same technology on a
On Feb 6, 2014, at 12:44 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com wrote:
Merlin, this reminds me of the quote from Mencken: For every complex
problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.
Or as Niklaus Wirth said.
... complexity has and will maintain a strong fascination for
I found there is no option to disable sync for pg_log in pg_basebackup,
maybe there should be one option to disalbe it?
jvsrvcs wrote
I tried that but get an error
v_start_date date;
v_minus_one_year date;
I have v_start_date to start with and want to subtract one year and put
into v_minus_one_year
select v_start_date - interval '1 yr' as v_minus_one_year;
--- I get:
ERROR: query has
On 2/4/2014 10:06 PM, Roy Anderson wrote:
We have an OLTP database and no data warehouse. We are currently
planning out a build for a data warehouse however (possibly using
Hadoop). X is recommending that we convert our current, normalized
OLTP database into a flattened Star Schema.
The primary
Em 06/02/2014 14:25, Bret Stern escreveu:
You checked pg_hba_conf for host 10.68.73.6?
Is there a matching log entry for the rejection?
Thanks for your effort, Bret!
Problem already solved (I've posted the solution in the list past days).
Problem was a context.xml with a wrong database server
Not sure that it makes a difference but the docs say psql looks at
LC_CTYPE not LANG for Unix systems. You did not say what OS you are
working on though from the examples I am guessing some form of Unix.
Thank you for the response.
Sorry, I had not indicated OS information.
OS information
I'd like to provide public access, without a password, to a database hosted
on Amazon RDS.
I'm familiar with using pg_hba.conf to enable trust (no) authentication for
a user. pg_hba.conf is not available to DBAs on RDS.
Is there any other way to achieve password-less login in postgresql? I
tried
Reece Hart wrote
I'd like to provide public access, without a password, to a database
hosted
on Amazon RDS.
I'm familiar with using pg_hba.conf to enable trust (no) authentication
for
a user. pg_hba.conf is not available to DBAs on RDS.
Is there any other way to achieve password-less
On 2/6/2014 6:07 PM, Reece Hart wrote:
I'd like to provide public access, without a password, to a database
hosted on Amazon RDS.
I'm familiar with using pg_hba.conf to enable trust (no)
authentication for a user. pg_hba.conf is not available to DBAs on RDS.
Is there any other way to
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 6:37 PM, David Johnston pol...@yahoo.com wrote:
Doubtful.
Yeah, that's what I had assumed too.
The question is motivated entirely by what I think would make it easier for
users. In principle it's not difficult to give people a password (as I do
now), but in practice
Hello,
My understanding is that WAL archiving can not be enabled on the slave in a
streaming replication pair.
If this is correct, is there a reason behind it? I can see logs showing up
in pg_xlog, so could they not be archived?
The reason I ask is if this happened it would allow the following
Reece Hart wrote
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 6:37 PM, David Johnston lt;
polobo@
gt; wrote:
Doubtful.
Yeah, that's what I had assumed too.
The question is motivated entirely by what I think would make it easier
for
users. In principle it's not difficult to give people a password (as I
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 6:37 PM, David Johnston pol...@yahoo.com wrote:
Doubtful.
Yeah, that's what I had assumed too.
The question is motivated entirely by what I think would make it easier for
users. In principle it's not difficult to give people a password (as I do
now), but in
51 matches
Mail list logo
