[GENERAL] 9.6 beta2 win-x64 download links still point to beta1

2016-06-23 Thread Thomas Kellerer
Hello, the Beta2 downloads on http://www.enterprisedb.com/products-services-training/pgdownload http://www.enterprisedb.com/products-services-training/pgbindownload still lead to Beta1 for the Windows 64bit builds. All others properly link to beta1 Thomas -- Sent via pgsql-general

[GENERAL] Concerned to discover DOMAINs can be the same as built in types with no escaping

2016-06-23 Thread Justin Dearing
Hello, We happen to have in our schema the following domain. CREATE DOMAIN public.name varchar(50) NOT NULL; This was done before me. We assumed this was used in many tables in our app. Then I wrote a function with a return clause like the following: RETURNS ( id INT, name name, other_names

Re: [GENERAL] What Causes Access Exclusive Lock?

2016-06-23 Thread Sameer Kumar
On Fri, 24 Jun 2016, 6:23 a.m. Jeff Janes, wrote: > On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Sameer Kumar > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 24 Jun 2016, 1:47 a.m. Jeff Janes, wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 8:14 AM, Sameer Kumar

Re: [GENERAL] Transaction serialization

2016-06-23 Thread Thomas Munro
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 4:13 AM, Dusan Milanov wrote: > Hi, > > A question about transactions: does postgres report serialization errors > before a transaction is committed? Obviously, it does on commit, but how > about previous statements? Can there be an

Re: [GENERAL] What Causes Access Exclusive Lock?

2016-06-23 Thread Jeff Janes
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Sameer Kumar wrote: > > > On Fri, 24 Jun 2016, 1:47 a.m. Jeff Janes, wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 8:14 AM, Sameer Kumar >> wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > I just wanted to understand

[GENERAL] Transaction serialization

2016-06-23 Thread Dusan Milanov
Hi, A question about transactions: does postgres report serialization errors before a transaction is committed? Obviously, it does on commit, but how about previous statements? Can there be an ERRCODE_T_R_SERIALIZATION_FAILURE error as a response to anything else but the commit? Best regards,

Re: [GENERAL] What Causes Access Exclusive Lock?

2016-06-23 Thread Sameer Kumar
On Fri, 24 Jun 2016, 1:54 a.m. Sameer Kumar, wrote: > > > On Fri, 24 Jun 2016, 1:47 a.m. Jeff Janes, wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 8:14 AM, Sameer Kumar >> wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > I just wanted to understand

Re: [GENERAL] What Causes Access Exclusive Lock?

2016-06-23 Thread Sameer Kumar
On Fri, 24 Jun 2016, 1:47 a.m. Jeff Janes, wrote: > On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 8:14 AM, Sameer Kumar > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I just wanted to understand what are the commands which will acquire > Access > > Exclusive Lock on a table? In my

Re: [GENERAL] What Causes Access Exclusive Lock?

2016-06-23 Thread Jeff Janes
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 8:14 AM, Sameer Kumar wrote: > > Hi, > > I just wanted to understand what are the commands which will acquire Access > Exclusive Lock on a table? In my knowledge below operations will acquire > access exclusive lock:- > > 1. VACUUM FULL > 2. ALTER

Re: [GENERAL] What Causes Access Exclusive Lock?

2016-06-23 Thread Sameer Kumar
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 11:57 PM Adrian Klaver wrote: > On 06/23/2016 08:14 AM, Sameer Kumar wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I just wanted to understand what are the commands which will acquire > > Access Exclusive Lock on a table? In my knowledge below operations will > >

Re: [GENERAL] What Causes Access Exclusive Lock?

2016-06-23 Thread Adrian Klaver
On 06/23/2016 08:14 AM, Sameer Kumar wrote: Hi, I just wanted to understand what are the commands which will acquire Access Exclusive Lock on a table? In my knowledge below operations will acquire access exclusive lock:- 1. VACUUM FULL 2. ALTER TABLE 3. DROP TABLE 4. TRUNCATE 5. REINDEX 6.

[GENERAL] What Causes Access Exclusive Lock?

2016-06-23 Thread Sameer Kumar
Hi, I just wanted to understand what are the commands which will acquire Access Exclusive Lock on a table? In my knowledge below operations will acquire access exclusive lock:- 1. VACUUM FULL 2. ALTER TABLE 3. DROP TABLE 4. TRUNCATE 5. REINDEX 6. LOCK command with Access Exclusive Mode (or no

Re: [GENERAL] client_min_messages and INFO

2016-06-23 Thread Tom Lane
Jason Dusek writes: > I notice that INFO is not included in the list of settable levels for > client_min_messages: > This seems to be true several versions back so I wonder: what is the > rationale? Is it like the reverse of LOG? INFO is used for cases where the user

[GENERAL] Re: ERROR: missing chunk number 0 for toast value while using logical decoder.\

2016-06-23 Thread sudalai
Thank u. The problem is because of the commented line. I forgot about that. Now, I uncommented it. It working fine. Thank u very much. -Sudalai - sudalai -- View this message in context:

Re: [GENERAL] Re: ERROR: missing chunk number 0 for toast value while using logical decoder.\

2016-06-23 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 4:55 PM, sudalai wrote: > Thanks for : https://github.com/michaelpq/pg_plugins/tree/master/decoder_raw > I will upgrade my servers to PostgreSQL 9.5.3, but i want to find the > problem. > Please help me. > I don't have SQL sequence. > Does anything i

[GENERAL] Re: ERROR: missing chunk number 0 for toast value while using logical decoder.\

2016-06-23 Thread sudalai
Thanks for : https://github.com/michaelpq/pg_plugins/tree/master/decoder_raw I will upgrade my servers to PostgreSQL 9.5.3, but i want to find the problem. Please help me. I don't have SQL sequence. Does anything i can get from server, that will help us to debug the problem? Here is

[GENERAL] Re: ERROR: missing chunk number 0 for toast value while using logical decoder.\

2016-06-23 Thread sudalai
Hi john, PostgreSQL 9.5.0 has bug !!!, Does 9.5.0 remove unconsumed toast rows need for slot?? It is fixed in latest!!!. -Sudalai - sudalai -- View this message in context:

Re: [GENERAL] ERROR: missing chunk number 0 for toast value while using logical decoder.\

2016-06-23 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 3:38 PM, sudalai wrote: > > I am using PostgresSQL 9.5.0. > I have customized : > https://github.com/michaelpq/pg_plugins/tree/master/decoder_raw to get > result as json. It works fine. suddenly i getting below exception while > consuming or peeking

Re: [GENERAL] ERROR: missing chunk number 0 for toast value while using logical decoder.\

2016-06-23 Thread John R Pierce
On 6/22/2016 11:38 PM, sudalai wrote: I am using PostgresSQL 9.5.0. while this likely has no bearing on your problem, you really should upgrade to 9.5.latest, 9.5.3 is out now.sub version upgrades like 9.5.0 to 9.5.3 are painless, just upgrade and restart the server with the new code.

[GENERAL] client_min_messages and INFO

2016-06-23 Thread Jason Dusek
Hi List, I notice that INFO is not included in the list of settable levels for client_min_messages: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.5/static/runtime-config-logging.html#GUC-CLIENT-MIN-MESSAGES This seems to be true several versions back so I wonder: what is the rationale? Is it like the

[GENERAL] ERROR: missing chunk number 0 for toast value while using logical decoder.\

2016-06-23 Thread sudalai
I am using PostgresSQL 9.5.0. I have customized : https://github.com/michaelpq/pg_plugins/tree/master/decoder_raw to get result as json. It works fine. suddenly i getting below exception while consuming or peeking changes through that logical slot. Does postgres removed the rows needed for