El 12/08/15 a las 11:12, Tom Lane escribió:
Adrian Klaver adrian.kla...@aklaver.com writes:
On 08/12/2015 06:46 AM, Bianchi Quota Leonardo wrote:
Hi, I'm trying to move a db from postgres 8.1 encoded LATIN9 from a
debian 4.0 box to postgres 8.4 encoded UTF8 on a rh6.6 (the whole job
is to
Hey,
I have set up three nodes of postgresql 9.4 with repmgr in this way:
1. master - node1
2. standby - node2
3. witness - node3
Now I have set up the replication and the witness as it says here:
https://github.com/2ndQuadrant/repmgr/blob/master/FAILOVER.rst
Now when I do 'kill -9 $(pidof
Hi Aviel,
you can use the 'show cluster' command to see the repmgr state before you
do the 2nd failover - make sure the node1 is indeed marked as replica.
After a failover the Master doesn't automatically attach to the new master
- you need to point him as a slave (standby follow - if possible...)
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 8:03 AM, Melvin Davidson melvin6...@gmail.com
wrote:
This should put a smile on all PostgreSQL DBA's faces.
The Best Overall Database
http://www.dbta.com/Editorial/Trends-and-Applications/Best-Database-Overall%C2%AD-105362.aspx
Very nice. Of course, I have a thing
-- Forwarded message --
From: Aviel Buskila avie...@gmail.com
Date: 2015-08-13 15:43 GMT+03:00
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] repmgr won't update witness after failover
To: Jony Cohen jony.cohe...@gmail.com
Hey,
I have just tried to start the repmgrd on the new standby after I have
This should put a smile on all PostgreSQL DBA's faces.
The Best Overall Database
http://www.dbta.com/Editorial/Trends-and-Applications/Best-Database-Overall%C2%AD-105362.aspx
*Melvin Davidson*
I reserve the right to fantasize. Whether or not you
wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you.
Hello,
if I am reading the documentation on explicit locking
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/interactive/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-TABLES
correctly, SELECT should never conflict with UPDATE. However, what I am
observing as a result of this monitoring query:
SELECT bl.pid AS
I uinderstand and agree. In like fashion, I have a large dislike for MySQL
and Access. But then again, are either of them really db's? :)
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 9:21 AM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 8:03 AM, Melvin Davidson melvin6...@gmail.com
On 08/13/2015 06:39 AM, twoflower wrote:
Hello,
if I am reading the documentation on explicit locking
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/interactive/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-TABLES
correctly, SELECT should never conflict with UPDATE. However, what I am
observing as a result of this
On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 09:46:49 -0400, Melvin Davidson melvin6...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 9:21 AM, John McKown
john.archie.mck...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 8:03 AM, Melvin Davidson melvin6...@gmail.com
wrote:
This should put a smile on all PostgreSQL DBA's
twoflower standa.ku...@gmail.com writes:
if I am reading the documentation on explicit locking
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/interactive/explicit-locking.html#LOCKING-TABLES
correctly, SELECT should never conflict with UPDATE.
Pure SELECT, I would think not. But is it really a
Em 13/08/2015 00:40, Joshua D. Drake escreveu:
On 08/12/2015 05:33 PM, Edson Richter wrote:
Hi!
I've a situation where I would like to keep sync replication, where
servers have 10Mbps network connection but high latency (normally, ~20ms
but sometimes, 1000ms~2000ms, even 3000ms when network
On 08/13/2015 07:41 AM, Edson Richter wrote:
Em 13/08/2015 00:40, Joshua D. Drake escreveu:
On 08/12/2015 05:33 PM, Edson Richter wrote:
Hi!
I've a situation where I would like to keep sync replication, where
servers have 10Mbps network connection but high latency (normally, ~20ms
but
=?UTF-8?Q?Mart=c3=adn_Marqu=c3=a9s?= martin.marq...@gmail.com writes:
El 12/08/15 a las 11:12, Tom Lane escribió:
It does not seem likely to me that this would work at all. You're taking
a dump file that is full of LATIN9 data and simply asserting that it's
UTF8 data. That doesn't make it
(But thank you for the response!!!)
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Wayne E. Seguin wayneeseg...@gmail.com
wrote:
The question is specifically about the replication feature mentioned here
http://www.pgpool.net/mediawiki/index.php/Main_Page for the purposes of
failing over minimizing
I hope you realize that support for Windows 2003 ended July 2015
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/server-cloud/products/windows-server-2003/
Plus you never mentioned WHICH VERSION of PostgreSQL you are trying to
install.
Perhaps you should try a supported version of PostgreSQL on a supported
The question is specifically about the replication feature mentioned here
http://www.pgpool.net/mediawiki/index.php/Main_Page for the purposes of
failing over minimizing downtime.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com
wrote:
On 08/13/2015 08:52 AM, Wayne E.
On 08/13/2015 08:52 AM, Wayne E. Seguin wrote:
BDR is only one in Beta compare to stable options:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Replication,_Clustering,_and_Connection_Pooling.
Not sure why this solution would be chosen. Experience with pgpool is
that you only needed to change a port and no
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 01:14:12 +0100, Adrian Klaver
adrian.kla...@aklaver.com wrote:
On 08/13/2015 05:03 PM, Stephen Feyrer wrote:
Hi,
This is probably not an original question merely one which I haven't
been able to find an answer for.
Basically, the question is why is there not an
On 08/13/2015 02:14 PM, twoflower wrote:
Further observation: Now I managed to get rid of the blocking. I am not sure
if you are familiar with the NHibernate ORM, but it has a concept of a
stateful and stateless sessions. Session holds a connection to the database
and transaction is created on a
On 08/13/2015 05:03 PM, Stephen Feyrer wrote:
Hi,
This is probably not an original question merely one which I haven't
been able to find an answer for.
Basically, the question is why is there not an equivalent foreign key
concept to match the primary key we all already know an love?
How this
On 08/13/2015 05:23 PM, Guyren Howe wrote:
It surprises me that no SQL database to my knowledge has polymorphic joins as a
first-class feature.
A polymorphic join is where a fk contains not just an id but an indicator of
which table it refers to.
I am pretty sure it already does that:
twoflower standa.ku...@gmail.com writes:
Tom Lane-2 wrote
So either the SELECT is a SELECT FOR UPDATE, or it's part of a transaction
that's done datachanges in the past.
If these are the only two explanations, it must be the latter then. What I
still don't understand - these two statements
El 13/08/15 a las 11:41, Edson Richter escribió:
Em 13/08/2015 00:40, Joshua D. Drake escreveu:
On 08/12/2015 05:33 PM, Edson Richter wrote:
Hi!
I've a situation where I would like to keep sync replication, where
servers have 10Mbps network connection but high latency (normally, ~20ms
It surprises me that no SQL database to my knowledge has polymorphic joins as a
first-class feature.
A polymorphic join is where a fk contains not just an id but an indicator of
which table it refers to. So you could have a tags table, that can attach
tags to any of a variety of other tables.
El 13/08/15 a las 17:37, Melvin Davidson escribió:
You have not stated which Version or PostgreSQL,
He said it was for 9.4.
Is there anything out there like this? This would be for 9.4.
--
Martín Marquéshttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support,
For your information, I would like to explain a little bit more about
pgpool-II own replication (we call it native replication mode to
separate from streaming replication or slony replication).
In the pgpool-II's native replication mode, for a start pgpool-II
sends the query to master PostgreSQL
On 08/13/2015 05:40 PM, Stephen Feyrer wrote:
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 01:14:12 +0100, Adrian Klaver
adrian.kla...@aklaver.com wrote:
On 08/13/2015 05:03 PM, Stephen Feyrer wrote:
Hi,
This is probably not an original question merely one which I haven't
been able to find an answer for.
Basically,
Hi,
This is probably not an original question merely one which I haven't been
able to find an answer for.
Basically, the question is why is there not an equivalent foreign key
concept to match the primary key we all already know an love?
How this would work, would be that the foreign key
On 08/13/2015 12:49 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
I am looking for an extension or a technique that will allow me to
intercept a query by the exact query text, and replace that query with a
different one.
What is sending the query?
In other words what library is the app using to communicate with the
Further observation: Now I managed to get rid of the blocking. I am not sure
if you are familiar with the NHibernate ORM, but it has a concept of a
stateful and stateless sessions. Session holds a connection to the database
and transaction is created on a particular session. In this case, 'begin
El 13/08/15 a las 14:37, Wayne E. Seguin escribió:
The question is specifically about the replication feature mentioned here
http://www.pgpool.net/mediawiki/index.php/Main_Page for the purposes of
failing over minimizing downtime.
They aim a completely different problems.
The thing Joshua
I am looking for an extension or a technique that will allow me to
intercept a query by the exact query text, and replace that query with a
different one.
The context is running a third-party app which issues queries I have no
control over. I'd like to intercept a specific query (which has no
The Postgres version is 9.3.9.
The actual output of the lock query is (I added *locktype* and *mode*
columns from the *pg_locks* table)
*blocked_pid*: 7574
*blocked_statement*: UPDATE TRANSLATION SET fk_assignment_queue_item =
1009184 WHERE id IN (47049861)
*blocked_locktype*: transactionid
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 7:26 PM, Stephen Feyrer
stephen.fey...@btinternet.com wrote:
When we design databases, invariably, normally we design the queries at
the same time.
Well this may be true to an extent well implemented models have the
ability to answer questions (queries) the original
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 01:58:29 +0100, Adrian Klaver
adrian.kla...@aklaver.com wrote:
On 08/13/2015 05:40 PM, Stephen Feyrer wrote:
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 01:14:12 +0100, Adrian Klaver
adrian.kla...@aklaver.com wrote:
On 08/13/2015 05:03 PM, Stephen Feyrer wrote:
Hi,
This is probably not an
On 08/13/2015 05:37 PM, Martín Marqués wrote:
El 13/08/15 a las 21:23, Guyren Howe escribió:
I also think migrations ought to be a first-class feature…
What do you mean with migrations ought to be a first-class feature?
There have been, and there still are efforts for making upgrading as
On 08/13/2015 05:59 PM, Guyren Howe wrote:
Ccing list
On Aug 13, 2015, at 17:49 , Adrian Klaver adrian.kla...@aklaver.com wrote:
A polymorphic join is where a fk contains not just an id but an indicator of
which table it refers to.
I am pretty sure it already does that:
El 13/08/15 a las 21:23, Guyren Howe escribió:
I also think migrations ought to be a first-class feature…
What do you mean with migrations ought to be a first-class feature?
There have been, and there still are efforts for making upgrading as
smooth and simple as possible, but I'm not really
You have not stated which Version or PostgreSQL, nor the O/S involved. That
being said, depending on what the specific query is, you might consider
using a Rule or Trigger to handle it. If you use a Trigger ( which is the
preferred method) you can also embed set commands the associated function.
Hello everyone!
The context of this is using BDR to implement a HA solution where we have
one node getting all connections at a time, if the node fails we move all
connections to another node. (eg. only one node gets all connections at any
given time).
I am looking for help / advice on how to
41 matches
Mail list logo
