Bruce Momjian wrote:
> ENGEMANN, DAYSE wrote:
>> pg_dump -h sourcemachine -U sourceuser source_dbname \
>> | psql target_dbname
>
> Has anyone done any measurement of whether it is faster to do the
> dump on the local machine with psql remote or from a remote
> machine (where psql would be l
On 8/9/10 5:14 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
ENGEMANN, DAYSE wrote:
Hi Kevin,
Sorry to disturb you.. But I am really new in it...
Let me see if I understood...
pg_dump -h sourcemachine -U sourceuser source_dbname | psql target_dbname
Has anyone done any measurement of whether it is faster to do
Craig James wrote:
> If you have a slow network, then run pg_dump on the machine where
> the database lives and use compression (--format=c) and restore
> using pg_restore. It will cut WAY down on the amount of data that
> has to move across the net.
If you don't mind dancing around a bit you
Hello Community,
I recently installed Postgres Plus 8.4.4 on Windows 7 32-bit machine.
The Postgres server is up and running but when I call psql it gives fatal error
saying "password authentication failed for user singh09721".
I am new to this database. Can someone please help me.
Thanks in ad
Gaurav Singh wrote:
> The Postgres server is up and running but when I call psql it
> gives fatal error saying "password authentication failed for user
> singh09721".
You are probably not specifying a database user ID for psql to use,
so it is defaulting to your OS login ID. Do you get in if
Hello Postgres Gurus,
Is it expected behavior for the has_table_privilege postgres function to not
handle the user PUBLIC? Or should I submit a bug?
The has_table_privilege function does not handle PUBLIC - the following queries
returns the error:
SELECT has_table_privilege ('PUBLIC','bob.gdb.t
2010/8/10 Kasia Tuszynska
> Hello Postgres Gurus,
>
>
>
> Is it expected behavior for the has_table_privilege postgres function to
> not handle the user PUBLIC? Or should I submit a bug?
>
>
>
> The has_table_privilege function does not handle PUBLIC – the following
> queries returns the error:
Szymon,
The PUBLIC role is a default, non login role, that is created with every
postgres cluster/instance.
To my knowledge PUBLIC is a standard user in any rdbms. So, existence of
public is not the issue here.
Sincerely,
Kasia
From: Szymon Guz [mailto:mabew...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August
Excerpts from Kasia Tuszynska's message of mar ago 10 15:08:20 -0400 2010:
> Hello Postgres Gurus,
>
> Is it expected behavior for the has_table_privilege postgres function to not
> handle the user PUBLIC? Or should I submit a bug?
>
> The has_table_privilege function does not handle PUBLIC - th
2010/8/10 Kasia Tuszynska
> Szymon,
>
> The PUBLIC role is a default, non login role, that is created with every
> postgres cluster/instance.
>
> To my knowledge PUBLIC is a standard user in any rdbms. So, existence of
> public is not the issue here.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Kasia
>
>
No, there is no
Szymon Guz wrote:
> No, there is no PUBLIC default role in ANY rdbms. In PostgreSQL
> there is PUBLIC schema, not role. In my PostgreSQL database there
> wasn't any such role... but I'll check that now... ok, I've
> checked, I've got 15 roles, none is names PUBLIC, what's more, I
> don't have an
2010/8/10 Kevin Grittner
> Szymon Guz wrote:
>
> > No, there is no PUBLIC default role in ANY rdbms. In PostgreSQL
> > there is PUBLIC schema, not role. In my PostgreSQL database there
> > wasn't any such role... but I'll check that now... ok, I've
> > checked, I've got 15 roles, none is names P
Kevin,
I know public is there from using it every day, but if it were not for you post
I would not know how to prove it, none of the views, graphical admin tools etc.
display it as a user.
We found this issue because we can grant privs to public on a table, but could
not revoke them. If I did
2010/8/10 Kasia Tuszynska
> Kevin,
> I know public is there from using it every day, but if it were not for you
> post I would not know how to prove it, none of the views, graphical admin
> tools etc. display it as a user.
>
> We found this issue because we can grant privs to public on a table, b
Kasia Tuszynska wrote:
Szymon,
The PUBLIC role is a default, non login role, that is created with every
postgres cluster/instance.
To my knowledge PUBLIC is a standard user in any rdbms. So, existence
of public is not the issue here.
Sincerely,
Kasia
Kasia,
I think your assumption
Kasia Tuszynska wrote:
> We found this issue because we can grant privs to public on a
> table, but could not revoke them.
Odd.
test=# create table t1 (c1 int primary key);
NOTICE: CREATE TABLE / PRIMARY KEY will create implicit index
"t1_pkey" for table "t1"
CREATE TABLE
test=# grant inser
Please ignore my previous response, there's no value there.
List traffic in the meantime (since I composed and sent it) has far more good
information.
sorry,
~c
--
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.pos
Per my original email, we were calling the has_table_privilege function to
revoke rather than simply revoking.
Thank you very much,
Sincerely,
Kasia
-Original Message-
From: Kevin Grittner [mailto:kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 1:00 PM
To: Kasia Tuszynska;
Tom Lane wrote:
We can't portably lock the socket file itself, so we make a separate
ordinary file for locking purposes.
It looks to me like the fact that the .lock file is created is only
documented in src/backend/utils/init/miscinit.c , and even there the
reason why (what you wrote above
Greg Smith writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> We can't portably lock the socket file itself, so we make a separate
>> ordinary file for locking purposes.
> It looks to me like the fact that the .lock file is created is only
> documented in src/backend/utils/init/miscinit.c , and even there the
> reas
Hi,
Our production server is running PostgreSQL v8.2.3 on Red Hat Enterprise
Linux Server release 5 (Tikanga).
I need a clarification on how autovacuum daemon internally works/handles in
the following specific use case/situation:
1. Does autovacuum daemon works with one table at a time or does i
21 matches
Mail list logo
