Re: To create or not to create that index

Ah no it is not. Something else was changed at the same time. Sigh. Thanks for clarifying David On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 10:42 AM Stefan Knecht wrote: > But that "invalid" index is being used by queries > > On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 10:41 AM David G. Johnston < > david.g.johns...@gmail.com>

Re: To create or not to create that index

On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 8:43 PM Stefan Knecht wrote: > But that "invalid" index is being used by queries > >> >> Please don't top-post. If it is used by queries it isn't invalid and thus its existence shouldn't be surprising. So I'm not sure what you are saying. David J.

Re: To create or not to create that index

But that "invalid" index is being used by queries On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 10:41 AM David G. Johnston < david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 8:37 PM Stefan Knecht > wrote: > >> Hello >> >> Why does this happen? >> >> profile_aggregates=> create index concurrently

Re: To create or not to create that index

On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 8:37 PM Stefan Knecht wrote: > Hello > > Why does this happen? > > profile_aggregates=> create index concurrently foo_idx on agg (status, > foots, created_ts); > > > ^CCancel request sent > ERROR: canceling statement due to user request > profile_aggregates=> >

To create or not to create that index

Hello Why does this happen? profile_aggregates=> create index concurrently foo_idx on agg (status, foots, created_ts); ^CCancel request sent ERROR: canceling statement due to user request profile_aggregates=> profile_aggregates=> create index concurrently foo_idx on agg (status, foots,

Re: Base files compatibility between PG11 and PG15

On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 07:36:20AM -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote: > On 8/17/23 02:32, Abraham, Danny wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have a database on Aurora@RDS. > > It Used V11.9, and then upgraded automatically by AWS to V15.2 AWS states > > that it relies on compatibility provided by the PG

Re: AW: AW: Cast INTEGER to BIT confusion

On Thu, 17 Aug 2023 at 19:09, GF wrote: > > Erik, > The could be a possible solution, if you could play with search_path... > > (sorry, Erik, obviously my message was intended to Markus)

Re: AW: AW: Cast INTEGER to BIT confusion

Erik, The could be a possible solution, if you could play with search_path... You could mirror all the original schema onto another one with views that have the original table names. For all tables that need some special treatment you can then write instead-of triggers, while all other views are

Looking for PostgreSQL Tuning Workshop Presenter

Hi, I am the coordinator for a Cleveland Ohio user group interested in bringing in a presenter to do a deep dive on PostgreSQL plans and tuning. I'm relatively new to the community so don't know who to ask or who might be interested. If you know of someone that has deep experience and would be

Re: Fatal Error : Invalid Memory alloc request size 1236252631

On 8/17/23 07:35, Sai Teja wrote: Hi Team, Even I used postgreSQL Large Objects by referring this link to store and retrieve large files (As bytea not working) https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/largeobjects.html But even now I am unable to fetch the data at once from large objects

Re: Re: Fatal Error : Invalid Memory alloc request size 1236252631

Hi čt 17. 8. 2023 v 16:48 odesílatel Karsten Hilbert napsal: > > Even I used postgreSQL Large Objects by referring this link to store and > retrieve large files (As bytea not working) > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/largeobjects.html > > But even now I am unable to fetch the data at

Re: Schema renaming cascade

On 2023-Aug-17, Lorusso Domenico wrote: > Hello guys, > I need to rename a schema, including each reference to it (also for > functions) Maybe you should consider removing schema name references in function source code, and instead refer to the tables (and other functions, etc) by their

shared buffers

Hi, to my understanding it use to be "common sense" to limit shared buffers, maybe around 32 GB. due to ressources consumption of managing said cache. I would like to know if, on a v15 with 256 GB RAM, setting shared buffers to say 96 GB would benefit large BI queries ? Or to say it differently,

Schema renaming cascade

Hello guys, I need to rename a schema, including each reference to it (also for functions) I mean: I've 2 schemas called "schema1" and "schema2". In schema1 there are tables, composite types, and functions Functions call other functions in the same schema In schema2 Also in schema2 there are

Re: Dynamically accessing columns from a row type in a trigger

Well, some weeks ago, I read an article about that. The more efficient approach (in pgplsql) is to use hstore. With a similar topic, at the end, I created a group of functions that store in an internal table, data structure for each table under the same generic trigger. I also store, primary

Re: Base files compatibility between PG11 and PG15

On 8/17/23 02:32, Abraham, Danny wrote: Hi, I have a database on Aurora@RDS. It Used V11.9, and then upgraded automatically by AWS to V15.2 AWS states that it relies on compatibility provided by the PG community. We now experience problems with the data. This needs more information: 1)

Aw: Re: Fatal Error : Invalid Memory alloc request size 1236252631

  Even I used postgreSQL Large Objects by referring this link to store and retrieve large files (As bytea not working) https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/largeobjects.html   But even now I am unable to fetch the data at once from large objects   select lo_get(oid);   Here I'm getting the

Re: AW: AW: Cast INTEGER to BIT confusion

> On 17/08/2023 15:18 CEST Tom Lane wrote: > > That's probably because the grammar uses SystemTypeName (effectively > prepending "pg_catalog.") for any type that has special syntax called > out in the SQL standard. You could get around that in various ways, > but they all involve changing the

Re: Fatal Error : Invalid Memory alloc request size 1236252631

Hi Team, Even I used postgreSQL Large Objects by referring this link to store and retrieve large files (As bytea not working) https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/largeobjects.html But even now I am unable to fetch the data at once from large objects select lo_get(oid); Here I'm getting the

Re: AW: AW: Cast INTEGER to BIT confusion

> On 17/08/2023 09:31 CEST [Quipsy] Markus Karg wrote: > > I am giving up. While even `SELECT current_schemas(true)` correctly prints > `xxx, pg_catalog` it still uses the original bit type. This is completely > NOT as described in the documentation, where it is clearly told that > pg_catalog

Re: Cast INTEGER to BIT confusion

On Tuesday, August 15, 2023, Erik Wienhold wrote: > > On 15/08/2023 10:49 CEST [Quipsy] Markus Karg wrote: > > > > Hello PostgreSQL Community, > > > > I like to store just a single bit but that can be either 1 or 0, so I > tried > > You could create a custom domain if you're only interested in

Re: AW: AW: Cast INTEGER to BIT confusion

"[Quipsy] Markus Karg" writes: > I am giving up. While even `SELECT current_schemas(true)` correctly prints > `xxx, pg_catalog` it still uses the original bit type. This is completely NOT > as described in the documentation, where it is clearly told that pg_catalog > only is searched

Re: Cast INTEGER to BIT confusion

> On 17/08/2023 14:57 CEST rob stone wrote: > > It works thus:- > > postgres 15.4 =# CREATE TABLE T (c BIT); > CREATE TABLE > postgres 15.4 =# insert into T values (B'1'); > INSERT 0 1 > postgres 15.4 =# select * from t; > c > --- > 1 > (1 row) > > See section 9.6 in the doco. But Markus wrote

Re: Cast INTEGER to BIT confusion

Hello, On Tue, 2023-08-15 at 08:49 +, [Quipsy] Markus Karg wrote: > > > > Hello PostgreSQL Community, >   > I have 25+ years of experience with some other RDBMS, but I am a > PostgreSQL starter, so I assume the following is rather a simple > beginner’s question…: >   > I like to store

Sv: Base files compatibility between PG11 and PG15

På torsdag 17. august 2023 kl. 11:32:47, skrev Abraham, Danny < danny_abra...@bmc.com >: Hi, I have a database on Aurora@RDS. It Used V11.9, and then upgraded automatically by AWS to V15.2 AWS states that it relies on compatibility provided by the PG community. We

Base files compatibility between PG11 and PG15

Hi, I have a database on Aurora@RDS. It Used V11.9, and then upgraded automatically by AWS to V15.2 AWS states that it relies on compatibility provided by the PG community. We now experience problems with the data. Has anyone met similar issues? Compatibility of data files? Thanks Danny

Why doesn't autovacuum/analyze run in due time after calling pg_stat_reset?

Hi, all. After calling pg_stat_reset all statistics used by autovacuum got zeroed, and started accumulating from scratch. Some tables get acted upon properly, some don't. foo=> select relname,n_live_tup,n_dead_tup,cast(round(n_live_tup*cast(current_setting('autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor')

AW: AW: Cast INTEGER to BIT confusion

I am giving up. While even `SELECT current_schemas(true)` correctly prints `xxx, pg_catalog` it still uses the original bit type. This is completely NOT as described in the documentation, where it is clearly told that pg_catalog only is searched immediately if NOT found in the search path. It