Hi,
when "SELECT .. WHERE .. FOR NO KEY UPDATE" is used synchronize access,
and the transaction holding the lock completes, how does PostgreSQL
decide /which one/ of multiple waiting transactions will the lock be
granted to next?
In my testing (on Ubuntu 16.1-1.pgdg20.04+1, 64bit) with a
Am 30.11.22 um 20:01 schrieb Mladen Gogala:
On 11/30/22 10:40, Atul Kumar wrote:
Hi,
I have a 10TB database running on postgres 11 version running on
centos 7 "on premises", I need to schedule the backup of this
database in a faster way.
The scheduled backup will be used for PITR purposes.
Hi community,
I'm looking at a "SELECT * FROM pg_stat_statements" output and am
puzzled by the huge differences between min/max_exec_time even for
simple queries.
The most extreme example is probably the statement used by the
application's connection health check:
SELECT 1
min=0.001,
Hi,
Am 13.03.19 um 15:28 schrieb Thomas Güttler:
Where do you store Blobs?
Within PostgreSQL, of course. The system I have in mind stores ZIP and
PDF files, usually a few MBs each; we're currently at a total of about
100 GB and there are no evident problems.
For this application, it is
Hi again,
Am 10.02.19 um 16:41 schrieb Tom Lane:
Hannes Erven writes:
I've just had a "VACUUM FULL " crash due to 100% disk usage.
Clearly my fault, I was expecting the new table to be small enough.
What do you mean by "crash" exactly? A normal transactional failure
Hi,
I've just had a "VACUUM FULL " crash due to 100% disk usage.
Clearly my fault, I was expecting the new table to be small enough.
After freeing up space, restarting the cluster and issuing another
VACCUM FULL, I noticed that the cluster was way bigger that it should be.
In the base//
Hi David,
> I saw that when you create a JDBC connection, you can specify
> readOnly=true. Would doing so somehow help Postgres manage its other
> connections?
if you know that a certain connection will be ready-only, you could use
a more aggressive pooling strategy.
Usually, a connection
Hi,
consider a PG10 master center, streaming via internet to another site. The
receiving site has a fast primary uplink and much slower backup link.
When the primary link goes down, all traffic is routed through the backup
connection. The streaming replication's connection drops and is
Michael,
Am 2018-05-13 um 08:23 schrieb Michael Paquier:
On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 01:39:48AM +0200, Hannes Erven wrote:
what is Postgresql's strategy when to fetch WAL from the master while in
streaming replication, and could it be tweaked?
Fetching WAL from a primary (or another standby
Hi,
what is Postgresql's strategy when to fetch WAL from the master while in
streaming replication, and could it be tweaked?
I'm using a physical streaming replication slave to have a database
lagging behind about one month behind the primary, by setting
"recovery_target_time" to the
Hi Greig,
just last week I experienced the same situation as you on a 10.3
physical replica (it even has checksums activated), and a few months ago
on 9.6 .
We used the same resolution as you we, and so far we haven't noticed any
problems with data integrity on the replicas.
The logs
Hi Rhys,
Am 2018-01-21 um 02:42 schrieb Rhys A.D. Stewart:
Greetings All,
I'm having an issue which is very perplexing. The having clause in a
query doesn't appear to be working as I expect it. Either that or my
understanding of array_agg() is flawed.
>
> [...]
with listing as (
12 matches
Mail list logo
