On 20 Oct 2016, at 23:37, Maxim Boguk wrote:
> Underscore in like pattern have a special meaning of "any symbol".
> From documentation on the
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.4/static/functions-matching.html :
> "An underscore (_) in pattern stands for (matches) any single character;"
> This
Dear Team,
I have installed PostgreSQL 9.6 on two servers. One is master and other is
for slave server. Current setup as follows.
- Master Server - pgmaster
- Salve Server - pgslave
To implement this I have followed this article
https://www.digitalocean.com/community/tutorials/how-to-set-
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 2:45 AM, David G. Johnston <
david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Арсений Нестюк > wrote:
>
>>
>> I haven't thought about casting null before, it's interesting. It'll make
>> the implementation a little easier, but won't answer my question
CS DBA writes:
> we're seeing the below errors over and over in the logs of one of our
> postgres databases. Version 8.4.22
[ you really oughta get off 8.4, but you knew that right? ]
> Anyone have any thoughts on correcting/debugging it?
> ERROR: xlog flush request 2571/9C141530 is not satis
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Jason Dusek wrote:
> This is really only a temporary fix, though. We can have a cron job running
> in the background running TRUNCATE ONLY ... but this seems like the kind of
> thing that auto-vacuuming should have handled for us, before the problem got
> “too larg
Hi All,
I recently came across an interesting problem relating vacuuming, triggers
and table partitioning.
We have a “virtual table” with a BEFORE trigger that redirects writes to
its child tables. This was all fine well and good until we wanted to use
RETURNING to get the id back — the trigger r
On 10/21/2016 08:09 AM, Edilmar LISTAS wrote:
Hi,
I have 4 PG servers where each one runs many databases.
Now, I would like to create just one PG backup server to replicate all
the databases from 4 PG servers, is it possible? Or Do I need to create
4 PG backup servers?
More information is nee
Hi all;
we're seeing the below errors over and over in the logs of one of our
postgres databases. Version 8.4.22
Anyone have any thoughts on correcting/debugging it?
Maybe I need to run a REINDEX on whatever table equates to
"base/1029860192/1029863651"? If so how do I determine the db and
Hi.
You mean one and only one big cluster with all databases from your 4 PG
servers ?
What about running 4 clusters (different ports) in your backup server and
each taking replication from your master servers.
Regards,
Walter
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Edilmar LISTAS
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I h
We have a plpsql function that checks a threshold for a given data point
that seems to work well. The goal of the function is to find the last
sample before or equal to a given time.
The function runs the following sql command
SELECT outval >= 187500 FROM rrd.d_current
WHERE timeslot <= TO
Hi,
I have 4 PG servers where each one runs many databases.
Now, I would like to create just one PG backup server to replicate all
the databases from 4 PG servers, is it possible? Or Do I need to create
4 PG backup servers?
And if some PG server goes down, how to recovery the system from PG
Wow... I found it. The postgres database contained more
default privs. But PGAdmin III nothing say about dependents in it's reports.
Thanks!
2016-10-21 16:19 GMT+02:00 Durumdara :
> Dear Tom!
>
> Is there any tool what can show me the dependents or dependencies?
>
> In PGAdmi
Dear Tom!
Is there any tool what can show me the dependents or dependencies?
In PGAdmin I don't see any dependencies or dependents... :-(
Thanks
dd
2016-10-21 16:08 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane :
> Durumdara writes:
> > The DB_X dropped, so I can't choose it as "actual database".
> > I tried this in
Durumdara writes:
> The DB_X dropped, so I can't choose it as "actual database".
> I tried this in a neutral database:
> drop owned by role_x;
> But nothing happened, the error is same.
The error you are reporting is describing default privileges that
exist in the *current* database. You nee
Dear Tom!
The DB_X dropped, so I can't choose it as "actual database".
I tried this in a neutral database:
drop owned by role_x;
But nothing happened, the error is same.
As I read it have "CASCADE" mode, but I'm afraid to start it, because I
don't know what will happen.
It is a really use
Durumdara writes:
> We have a ROLE_MAIN.
> This gave default privileges to all next objects in DB_X to ROLE_X.
> Somebody dropped DB_X, and later he tried to drop ROLE_X.
> But he got errors in PGAdmin.
> ERROR: role "role_x" cannot be dropped because some objects depend on it
> DETAIL: privileg
Please let me rephrase my question so that it is better understandable -
In PostgreSQL 9.5.3 I keep player infos from various social networks:
# TABLE words_social;
sid | social | female | given | family | photo | place | stamp|
uid
---+++-++---+
Hello!
We created a DB named DB_X, and a role ROLE_X.
We have a ROLE_MAIN.
This gave default privileges to all next objects in DB_X to ROLE_X.
Somebody dropped DB_X, and later he tried to drop ROLE_X.
But he got errors in PGAdmin.
---
pgAdmin III
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 8:21 AM, wrote:
> Version : 9.2.13
You are missing over a year's worth of bug fixes.
https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/
> - remove a file called backup_label
http://tbeitr.blogspot.com/2015/07/deleting-backuplabel-on-restore-will.html
--
Kevin Grittne
Hello,
I currently have two functions, one on local side and one on remote.
The local function creates the dblink with all the required parameters, then
using dblink() function I call the remote function.
For the parameters of remote function I want to pass an array of records, I
create this ar
Jonathan Eastgate wrote:
> We're seeing some odd behaviour from a PostgreSQL group - one running as
> primary and the other as a
> hot slave using streaming replication.
>
> When a failover event occurs and we switch to the hot slave as primary
> sequences in tables jump by 33
> - so where the l
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 6:15 AM, Ashish Chauhan
wrote:
> *2016-10-18 22:11:30 UTC [13107-1] FATAL: database files are incompatible
> with server*
>
> *2016-10-18 22:11:30 UTC [13107-2] DETAIL: The data directory was
> initialized by PostgreSQL version 9.6, which is not compatible with this
> ve
22 matches
Mail list logo
