pgadmin tables are not system tables; they're just used by the pgadmin tool.
I believe there is an option to clean them out somewhere in pgadmin.
System tables & views start with pg_
- Stuart
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October
Hi Folks
We have about 300,000 records to update, I have
created a file with the ids of the records to be
updated, since the number of records to be updated is
very large, the update statement takes forever and
server slows down dramatically, therefore I want to do
one at a time.
Do you guys hav
A quick and dirty solution would be something like (untested):
while read line; do
psql dbname -c "update table ... use 'line' as your id and data"
sleep 5
done < filename
where "filename" is the file with the ids in it. "dbname" is the name of your DB (of
course!)
I am not su
Russ McBride writes:
> Thanks Peter, that got me a little further.
>
> Anyone out there gotten pgAcess working on Mac OS X? I haven't been
> able to make my way through a configure using the new 8.4 Tk
> snapshots that are up on the sourceforge site. I'm getting the
> following error:
> configu
I'm running postgresql 6.5.3 on RedHat 6.2 and when
I try to run vacuum from psql I receive the following message:
PortalHeapMemoryFree: 0x82ca450 not in alloc set!.
Also when I use the \dt command i receive the "Could'n find any tables!"
message.
I have the checked every database in the dat
Mr OCP writes:
> We have about 300,000 records to update, I have created a file with
> the ids of the records to be updated, since the number of records to
> be updated is very large, the update statement takes forever and
> server slows down dramatically, therefore I want to do one at a time.
T
On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, [iso-8859-1] Mr OCP wrote:
> Hi Folks
>
> We have about 300,000 records to update, I have
> created a file with the ids of the records to be
> updated, since the number of records to be updated is
> very large, the update statement takes forever and
> server slows down dramat
On 13 Oct 2001 at 0:41, Dan Langille wrote:
> I'm looking at giving other developers access to a development database,
> but I want to impose tight restrictions on who can do what. One thing I
> want to investigate is the ability to let them execute stored procedures
> but not view them.
>
>
Brian McCane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> An interesting point was that the duplicated key was actually in the
> table, but the existing unique index was happy as a clam.
Hmm. What datatype is the key, and what PG version are you running?
The only known cause of such problems at the moment is
On Wed, 17 Oct 2001, Stephan Szabo wrote:
SS> Use a trigger instead, something like
SS>
SS> create function adresses_trigger() returns opaque as '
SS> begin
SS> NEW.date_maj := now();
SS> return NEW;
SS> end;' language 'plpgsql';
hmm. it seems defaul pgsql installation does not contains defini
On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2001, Stephan Szabo wrote:
>
> SS> Use a trigger instead, something like
> SS>
> SS> create function adresses_trigger() returns opaque as '
> SS> begin
> SS> NEW.date_maj := now();
> SS> return NEW;
> SS> end;' language 'plpgsql';
Andrew Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Normally, 32 connections is heaps for what I need. However, I often get
> connections that seem to be doing nothing. For example:
> [bash]
> \_ postmaster -i -D/var/pgsql/data -N 32 -B 64
> \_ [postmaster]
> \_ /var/pgsql/bin/postgres 202.174.32.67
At 10:35 PM 10/17/01 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>There are no plans to make WAL into a replication facility, for reasons
>which were discussed on the developer lists as well.
But we =are= still planning to use the WAL to implement a point-in-time
recovery process, yes?
-crl
--
Ch
Russ,
are you using the 8.4a version. I got this from ADC news.
---
Apple is pleased to announce a native port of TK version 8.4a4 for Mac
OS X10.1. TK is a rapid application GUI toolkit used by Tcl, Perl, and
Python. The TK release allows script developers to run existing GUI
applic
Thanks guys...
I was able to do employ the symbolic link trick to get my old
filesystems set up for use with 7.1's way of doing things and am glad
I don't /really/ need to remember what the heck is that mounted on
/opt/postgresql/data/base/19162, etc..
This would have been less of a PITB if it h
On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Brian McCane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > An interesting point was that the duplicated key was actually in the
> > table, but the existing unique index was happy as a clam.
>
> Hmm. What datatype is the key, and what PG version are you running?
>
> The o
> At 10:35 PM 10/17/01 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >There are no plans to make WAL into a replication facility, for reasons
> >which were discussed on the developer lists as well.
>
> But we =are= still planning to use the WAL to implement a point-in-time
> recovery process, yes?
Yes, I t
Much too quick and dirty. With 300,000 updates this will take 1.5million
seconds, roughly 200 days. Even at a rate of 1 a second it will take
nearly four days. All this aside, I would probably use a perl script and
do batches of about 10-20, with a sleep. You can try something like the
followi
On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 01:55:33PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Normally, 32 connections is heaps for what I need. However, I often get
> > connections that seem to be doing nothing. For example:
>
> > [bash]
> > \_ postmaster -i -D/var/pgsql/data -N 32
Francisco Solari writes:
> I'm running postgresql 6.5.3
Time to upgrade.
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropria
Allan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> That's kinda hard to believe; how would a shared memory segment survive
>> a system crash?
> I don't think they can. Some options:
> (1) PostgreSQL keeps a reference to it somewhere and can get confused...
Indeed, there is a ref
"Chad R. Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 10:35 PM 10/17/01 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> There are no plans to make WAL into a replication facility, for reasons
>> which were discussed on the developer lists as well.
> But we =are= still planning to use the WAL to implement a point-
On Wed, 17 Oct 2001, Francisco Solari wrote:
> I'm running postgresql 6.5.3 on RedHat 6.2 and when I try to run
> vacuum from psql I receive the following message:
> PortalHeapMemoryFree: 0x82ca450 not in alloc set!.
> Also when I use the \dt command i receive the "Could'n find any tables!"
Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
> Andrew doesn't mention his platform, but if it's linux,
It is...
> those could just
> be swapped out processes: since the execution state gets swapped, the
> kernel only has minimal info about the process, including the original
> name. I'm guessing that his PHP setu
This is why I said this:
> > adjust the sleep to your own specs.
If he wants to "batch" them, then all he needs to do is add a condition/count:
#!/bin/sh
cnt=1
while read line; do
# "batches" of 20 or whatever you *want*
if [ "X$cnt" == "X20" ];
I Know, but if I can't dump all the tables in my database anything becomes
useless.
"Brett W. McCoy" wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2001, Francisco Solari wrote:
>
> > I'm running postgresql 6.5.3 on RedHat 6.2 and when I try to run
> > vacuum from psql I receive the following message:
> > PortalH
> Thanks guys...
>
> I was able to do employ the symbolic link trick to get my old
> filesystems set up for use with 7.1's way of doing things and am glad
> I don't /really/ need to remember what the heck is that mounted on
> /opt/postgresql/data/base/19162, etc..
>
> This would have been less o
27 matches
Mail list logo
