On 7/29/20 8:44 AM, Olivier Leprêtre wrote:
Hi,
I have a rather long pgsql procedure and I would like to detect which
step is currently executing (subscript 1,2,3…). Due to transaction
isolation, it’s not possible to make it write in a table or get nexval
from a sequence because values
Hi,
I have a rather long pgsql procedure and I would like to detect which step
is currently executing (subscript 1,2,3
). Due to transaction isolation,
its not possible to make it write in a table or get nexval from a sequence
because values become available only after the complete end of the
Hi,
If I have a user that is restricted to select access (only) on a single
table, is there any way to prevent that user from starting a transaction?
The reason for the question is that the select-only user can block another
session trying to run an alter table on that table if the select-only
Thanks Tom. The idle_in_transaction_session_timeout could work well, but it
seems to be just a default that can be overridden by a user post-login (or
am I missing something?). I'm thinking of setting lock_timeout as part of
the migration process so it will fail if it is unable to obtain a lock in
Steve Baldwin writes:
> If I have a user that is restricted to select access (only) on a single
> table, is there any way to prevent that user from starting a transaction?
No, but maybe setting statement_timeout and/or
idle_in_transaction_session_timeout for that user would be helpful
(cf ALTER
Steve Baldwin writes:
> Thanks Tom. The idle_in_transaction_session_timeout could work well, but it
> seems to be just a default that can be overridden by a user post-login (or
> am I missing something?).
It is that, but if you have an actively malicious user then you need to
keep them from
And I can also do this restore:
Would a pg_restore with a v12 client into a postgres v9.6 database work and be
officially supported?
-Markus
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Bruce Momjian
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. Juli 2020 13:49
> An: Zwettler Markus (OIZ)
> Cc: pgsql-general
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 10:53:34AM +, Zwettler Markus (OIZ) wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> An external supplier had a postgres v9.5 database which he dumped with a
> pg_dump v12 client in custom format using PgAdmin4.
>
>
>
> Would a pg_restore with a v12 client into a postgres v9.6 database
Hi,
An external supplier had a postgres v9.5 database which he dumped with a
pg_dump v12 client in custom format using PgAdmin4.
Would a pg_restore with a v12 client into a postgres v9.6 database work and be
officially supported?
Thanks, Markus
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 12:33:56PM +, Zwettler Markus (OIZ) wrote:
> And I can also do this restore:
>
>
> Would a pg_restore with a v12 client into a postgres v9.6 database work and
> be officially supported?
>
Uh, good question. You should still use the version of pg_restore that
you
I cannot use pg_restore v9.6 on a pg_dump v12 because otherwise: pg_restore:
[archiver] unsupported version (1.14) in file header
The external supplier did PG v9.5 database + pg_dump v12.
I would have to do pg_restore v12 (as of pg_dump v12) into my PG v9.6.
The version chain would be PG v9.5
"Zwettler Markus (OIZ)" writes:
> And I can also do this restore:
>
> Would a pg_restore with a v12 client into a postgres v9.6 database work and
> be officially supported?
>
It might work, but it's not completely guaranteed. Sometimes a new
pg_dump will use DDL syntax that doesn't exist in
On 7/29/20 3:53 AM, Zwettler Markus (OIZ) wrote:
Hi,
An external supplier had a postgres v9.5 database which he dumped with a
pg_dump v12 client in custom format using PgAdmin4.
Would a pg_restore with a v12 client into a postgres v9.6 database work
and be officially supported?
The best
On 7/29/20 6:38 AM, Zwettler Markus (OIZ) wrote:
I cannot use pg_restore v9.6 on a pg_dump v12 because otherwise: pg_restore:
[archiver] unsupported version (1.14) in file header
The external supplier did PG v9.5 database + pg_dump v12.
I would have to do pg_restore v12 (as of pg_dump v12)
"Daniel Westermann (DWE)" writes:
> So this is what we got today. In the log file there is this:
> 2020-07-29 16:33:23 CEST 101995 ERROR: out of memory
> 2020-07-29 16:33:23 CEST 101995 DETAIL: Failed on request of size 8265691 in
> memory context "PortalContext".
> 2020-07-29 16:33:23 CEST
"Daniel Westermann (DWE)" writes:
> The process eats all the available memory and finally dies:
> # create extension postgis;
> ERROR: out of memory
> DETAIL: Failed on request of size 8265691 in memory context
> "PortalContext".
> Time: 773569.877 ms (12:53.570)
I suspect it will depend on your localisation whether you need to account
for different decimal separators, but just in case:
SELECT replace(substring('-1,2%' from '^-?\d*[.,]?\d*'), ',', '.')::numeric;
On Wed, 22 Jul 2020 at 18:50, Andrus wrote:
> val function should return numeric value from
17 matches
Mail list logo
