On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 12:08 +0530, Siva Palanisamy wrote:
> Hi there!
>
> I'm inserting bulk records using COPY statement in PostgreSQL, and is
> successful. When I try to insert a record later manually, it throws duplicate
> sequence id error. What I realize is, the sequence ids are not getting
Hi there!
I'm inserting bulk records using COPY statement in PostgreSQL, and is
successful. When I try to insert a record later manually, it throws duplicate
sequence id error. What I realize is, the sequence ids are not getting updated
in its cache. Should I manually update the sequence number
(k)
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/INSERT-with-RETURNING-clause-inside-SQL-function-tp1923653p5445810.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To ma
Adrian Klaver writes:
> On 01/31/2012 04:36 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> What's not apparent to me is whether there's an argument for doing more
>>> than that. It strikes me that the current design is not very friendly
>>> towards the idea of an
On 31 Jan 2012, at 4:55, Nick wrote:
> I have a pretty well tuned setup, with appropriate indexes and 16GB of
> available RAM. Should this be taking this long? I forced it to not use
> a sequential scan and that only knocked a second off the plan.
>
>
On 01/31/2012 04:36 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I don't recall that we thought very hard about what should happen when
pg_dump switches are used to produce a selective dump, but ISTM
reasonable that if it's "user data" then it should be dumped only i
> Hello,
> Need some help. Hoping some of the smart people might know how to solve this.
>
> I'd like to replace all name/value pairs in a delimited string with the id
> of the name/value pair in my reference table.
> Eg
> St=IL&city=Chicago&street=Madison
> To
> 13&50&247
> Assuming St=IL i
Scot Kreienkamp writes:
> There's something wrong with the query that I've written based on what you
> gave me.
It looks like you forgot the ON condition for the next-to-last JOIN,
so the parser is still expecting another ON when it runs into the WHERE.
Personally I think this sort of FROM cons
"Nykolyn, Andy (AS)" writes:
> It is a straight CREATE TEMP TABLE. It does not happen on the same procedure
> every time. It happens on different procedures sometimes they are nested.
> These store procedures have been working for many years the same way. Only
> recently has this error been
Matthias writes:
> I've noticed the new range data types in 9.2dev. I'm really looking
> forward to use them, so I built postgres 9.2dev on windows to try.
> ...
> Do you have any explanation for these grossly wrong cost estimates?
The range operators don't have any selectivity estimation worthy
Tom,
There's something wrong with the query that I've written based on what you gave
me.
Here's what I have:
select bl.pid as Blocked_PID,
a.usename as Blocked_User,
kl.pid as Blocking_PID,
ka.usename as Blocking_User,
to_char(age(now(), a.query_start),'HH24h:MIm:SSs') as Age
from pg_catalog.pg
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 11:18:31PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I don't recall that we thought very hard about what should happen when
> pg_dump switches are used to produce a selective dump, but ISTM
> reasonable that if it's "user data" then it should be dumped only if
> data in a regular user table
Are you using EXECUTE or doing a straight CREATE TEMP TABLE ...?
Maybe a sample with sensitive info changed?
The insert you mention happens in the same procedure or is there a nested
procedure?
It is a straight CREATE TEMP TABLE. It does not happen on the same procedure
every time. It happen
On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 9:42:07 am Nykolyn, Andy (AS) wrote:
>
> Some questions first:
> 1) What language are you using in the stored procedures?
> The stored procedures are in Pl/Pgsql
Temp table in PL/pgSQL was improved in 8.3 to handle this case, so you should
be
covered.
http://www.p
Hello,
Need some help. Hoping some of the smart people might know how to solve this.
I'd like to replace all name/value pairs in a delimited string with the id of
the name/value pair in my reference table.
Eg
St=IL&city=Chicago&street=Madison
To
13&50&247
Assuming St=IL is id 13, city=Chica
Hi!
I am trying to compile a C function for windows using VS 2008 Express and I
getting this errors
pg2.cc:\program files\postgresql\9.0\include\server\pg_config_os.h(203) : error
C2011: 'timezone' : 'struct' type redefinitionc:\program
files\postgresql\9.0\include\server\pg_config_os.
I have a pretty well tuned setup, with appropriate indexes and 16GB of
available RAM. Should this be taking this long? I forced it to not use
a sequential scan and that only knocked a second off the plan.
QUERY
PLAN
--
Subject: EXT :Re: [GENERAL] Intermittent occurrence of ERROR: could not open
relation
On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 8:08:24 am Nykolyn, Andy (AS) wrote:
> I have been running PostgreSQL 8.4 on Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2
> for almost 3 years. I have recently been intermittently getting the
On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 8:08:24 am Nykolyn, Andy (AS) wrote:
> I have been running PostgreSQL 8.4 on Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2
> for almost 3 years. I have recently been intermittently getting the error
> "ERROR: could not open relation base/85599592/121526263: No such file or
> dir
Hello,
I've noticed the new range data types in 9.2dev. I'm really looking
forward to use them, so I built postgres 9.2dev on windows to try.
While testing I noticed one thing. I have a simple test table with 1
million rows. There's a column called valid_range (of type int4range)
which is GiST in
I have been running PostgreSQL 8.4 on Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2 for
almost 3 years. I have recently been intermittently getting the error "ERROR:
could not open relation base/85599592/121526263: No such file or directory".
It only appears to be happening during the execution of store
Fabrizio,
I'm using the value default..
The situation was when I executed some query large in the server
Slave, because I'm trying do balancement of charge.
Somebody could help me to solve this problem?
System: CentOS
Postgresql version: 9.1
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 5:55 AM, Dmitriy Igrishin wrote:
>> The point here is that you can exploit the tree structure with a btree
>> index. Before we got recursive queries, this was often the best way
>> to do it, but now it's kind of a niche solution to be used when
>> certain things fall into
Hi!
2012/1/31 Guillaume Lelarge
> On Tue, 2012-01-31 at 04:16 -0800, durumdara wrote:
> > Dear PGSQL Masters!
> >
> > I have a complicated question.
> >
> > Is there any way to extend the session information (what visible in
> > pgadmin's "Server Status")?
> >
> > I explain what I want to do:
>
On Tue, 2012-01-31 at 04:16 -0800, durumdara wrote:
> Dear PGSQL Masters!
>
> I have a complicated question.
>
> Is there any way to extend the session information (what visible in
> pgadmin's "Server Status")?
>
> I explain what I want to do:
>
> We used alternative DB in a place and I need to
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 00:41, Jerry Richards
wrote:
> I just installed postgreSQL 9.1 and noticed it hard-codes the folder
> /var/lib/pgsql/9.1 and it hard-codes the service name to be postgresql91.
> Why is the hard-coded version included in the naming?
Note that this is done by Linux distribu
Dear PGSQL Masters!
I have a complicated question.
Is there any way to extend the session information (what visible in
pgadmin's "Server Status")?
I explain what I want to do:
We used alternative DB in a place and I need to port this.
In this DB we using different db users for every real users.
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I don't recall that we thought very hard about what should happen when
> pg_dump switches are used to produce a selective dump, but ISTM
> reasonable that if it's "user data" then it should be dumped only if
> data in a regular user table would b
Hi.
I recreate database and a problem disapears.
Thanks.
pasman
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
29 matches
Mail list logo
