Re: [BUGS] panic? return of the btree-bug
"Pieter Jansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 2008-02-25 17:07:28 CET PANIC: failed to add item to the right > sibling for "ttrss_user_entries_feed_id" > What information is needed to further investigate this? What's the exact index definition (including datatypes of the index columns)? Are you using a nondefault fill factor? regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [BUGS] BUG #3968: ssh tunnel instructions could use improvement
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Am Montag, 18. Februar 2008 schrieb Faheem Mitha: ssh -L 333ssh -L :foo.com:5432 [EMAIL PROTECTED] I think this should be changed to ssh -L :localhost:5432 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Good point. Please see the updated version at http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/ssh-tunnels.html in a few minutes. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ Hi Peter, Thanks for agreeing to the change. Your improvements to the page look good. At the end, you might want to point out that in the line ssh -L 6:db.foo.com:5432 [EMAIL PROTECTED] the connection from shell.foo.com to db.foo.com will not be encrypted by the ssh tunnel, at least according to the documentation I've read. Take care, Faheem. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
[BUGS] panic? return of the btree-bug
Hi,
2008-02-25 17:07:28 CET PANIC: failed to add item to the right
sibling for "ttrss_user_entries_feed_id"
2008-02-25 17:07:28 CET STATEMENT: INSERT INTO ttrss_user_entries
(ref_id, owner_uid, feed_id, unread, last_read, marked, published)
VALUES
('7135', '2', '18', true,
NULL, false, false)
2008-02-25 17:07:28 CET LOG: server process (PID 29709) was
terminated by signal 6
2008-02-25 17:07:28 CET LOG: terminating any other active server processes
2008-02-25 17:07:28 CET LOG: all server processes terminated; reinitializing
2008-02-25 17:07:28 CET LOG: database system was interrupted at
2008-02-25 17:05:30 CET
2008-02-25 17:07:28 CET LOG: checkpoint record is at 1/3C5A4FD8
2008-02-25 17:07:28 CET LOG: redo record is at 1/3C5A4FD8; undo
record is at 0/0; shutdown FALSE
2008-02-25 17:07:28 CET LOG: next transaction ID: 0/6130996; next OID: 42761
2008-02-25 17:07:28 CET LOG: next MultiXactId: 1; next MultiXactOffset: 0
2008-02-25 17:07:28 CET LOG: database system was not properly shut
down; automatic recovery in progress
2008-02-25 17:07:28 CET LOG: redo starts at 1/3C5A5028
2008-02-25 17:07:28 CET LOG: record with zero length at 1/3C641230
2008-02-25 17:07:28 CET LOG: redo done at 1/3C641200
2008-02-25 17:07:28 CET LOG: database system is ready
There is 1 process updating the ttrss_user_entries table rather often
(every 10 seconds +/- 100 queries).
There are several client processes (perl cgi) with their own dbi
connections to the database. I am unaware how many parallel users I
have.
Version: PostgreSQL 8.2.5 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC cc
(GCC) 4.1.3 20070831 (prerelease) (Ubuntu 4.1.2-16ubuntu1)
Vacuum cron entry:
2 0,5,10,15,20 * * 1-6 root if [ -x /usr/sbin/pg_maintenance ]; then
/usr/sbin/pg_maintenance --analyze >/dev/null; fi
What information is needed to further investigate this?
Kind regards,
Pieter Jansen
ICTree
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [BUGS] BUG #3968: ssh tunnel instructions could use improvement
Am Dienstag, 26. Februar 2008 schrieb Faheem Mitha: > At the end, you might want to point out that in the line > > ssh -L 6:db.foo.com:5432 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > the connection from shell.foo.com to db.foo.com will not be encrypted by > the ssh tunnel, at least according to the documentation I've read. Good point. Added. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [BUGS] help me plz with 2 postgres users
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How can I delete first postgres user. Ugh. How did you duplicate if there is an unique index in rolname ? pg_shadow is a view; you want to take a look at the real relation pg_authid. delete from pg_authid where ctid = '(0,1)' -- Euler Taveira de Oliveira http://www.timbira.com/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [BUGS] BUG #3968: ssh tunnel instructions could use improvement
Am Montag, 18. Februar 2008 schrieb Faheem Mitha: > ssh -L 333ssh -L :foo.com:5432 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I think this should be changed to > > ssh -L :localhost:5432 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Good point. Please see the updated version at http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/ssh-tunnels.html in a few minutes. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [BUGS] BUG #3991: pgsql function sum()
I think it is main problem. Try select sum(cast(33.08 as float) - cast(36.09 as float)); you get sum --- -3.010001 Better is to use numeric type if you don't have reason to use float/double. See http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/datatype-numeric.html#DATATYPE-FLOAT It describes your problem. Zdenek Mirosław Marek napsal(a): wv and wb are defined as double precision Mirek Zdenek Kotala pisze: mirek napsal(a): The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 3991 Logged by: mirek Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PostgreSQL version: 8.2.4 Operating system: Linux fedora(for work) and windows(for development) Description:pgsql function sum() Details: I saw a very strange behavior when i used function SUM() in query (used inside pg function), query: select magazyn, ciag, numer, datawp, vat, sum(wnetto-wnettop) as wn, sum(wvat-wvatp) as wv, sum(wbrutto-wbruttop) as wb from vzk_pozycjezinfo where magazyn = $1 and ciag = $2 and numer = $3 and datawp = $4 group by magazyn, ciag, numer, datawp, vat order by magazyn, ciag, numer, datawp, vat vzk_pozycjezinfo is view problem is in: sum(wvat-wvatp) where field in view wvat = 33.08 and wvatp = 36.09 Result is -3.010001 If I ask postgres manualy: select sum(33.08 - 36.09) result is ok -3.01 Now I fix it with round function but i think that is a bug. How are wv and wb attribute defined? Are they number or flout/double? Zdenek __ NOD32 Informacje 2903 (20080226) __ Wiadomosc zostala sprawdzona przez System Antywirusowy NOD32 http://www.nod32.com lub http://www.nod32.pl ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [BUGS] BUG #3991: pgsql function sum()
"mirek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > problem is in: sum(wvat-wvatp) where field in view wvat = 33.08 and wvatp = > 36.09 > Result is -3.010001 > If I ask postgres manualy: select sum(33.08 - 36.09) > result is ok -3.01 > Now I fix it with round function but i think that is a bug. You evidently haven't got much experience with working with floating-point arithmetic. regression=# select 33.08::numeric - 36.09::numeric; ?column? -- -3.01 (1 row) regression=# select 33.08::float8 - 36.09::float8; ?column? --- -3.010001 (1 row) This is not a bug, it's an inherent consequence of the fact that these decimal values are not exactly represented in a binary floating-point system. If you don't like it, don't use float. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [BUGS] BUG #3991: pgsql function sum()
mirek napsal(a): The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 3991 Logged by: mirek Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PostgreSQL version: 8.2.4 Operating system: Linux fedora(for work) and windows(for development) Description:pgsql function sum() Details: I saw a very strange behavior when i used function SUM() in query (used inside pg function), query: select magazyn, ciag, numer, datawp, vat, sum(wnetto-wnettop) as wn, sum(wvat-wvatp) as wv, sum(wbrutto-wbruttop) as wb from vzk_pozycjezinfo where magazyn = $1 and ciag = $2 and numer = $3 and datawp = $4 group by magazyn, ciag, numer, datawp, vat order by magazyn, ciag, numer, datawp, vat vzk_pozycjezinfo is view problem is in: sum(wvat-wvatp) where field in view wvat = 33.08 and wvatp = 36.09 Result is -3.010001 If I ask postgres manualy: select sum(33.08 - 36.09) result is ok -3.01 Now I fix it with round function but i think that is a bug. How are wv and wb attribute defined? Are they number or flout/double? Zdenek ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
[BUGS] help me plz with 2 postgres users
Hello? help me plz? i don't khow what to do... How can I delete first postgres user. template1=# select usename,passwd,valuntil,ctid,xmin,xmax,cmin,cmax from pg_shadow where usesysid=1; usename | passwd| valuntil | ctid | xmin | xmax | cmin | cmax --+-+--+---+--+--+--+-- postgres | | | (0,1) |1 | 16754522 | 16754522 |0 postgres | md65476547442532.. | infinity | (0,2) |2 |0 |0|0 (2 rows) thx for your help. Oleg ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
[BUGS] BUG #3991: pgsql function sum()
The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 3991 Logged by: mirek Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PostgreSQL version: 8.2.4 Operating system: Linux fedora(for work) and windows(for development) Description:pgsql function sum() Details: I saw a very strange behavior when i used function SUM() in query (used inside pg function), query: select magazyn, ciag, numer, datawp, vat, sum(wnetto-wnettop) as wn, sum(wvat-wvatp) as wv, sum(wbrutto-wbruttop) as wb from vzk_pozycjezinfo where magazyn = $1 and ciag = $2 and numer = $3 and datawp = $4 group by magazyn, ciag, numer, datawp, vat order by magazyn, ciag, numer, datawp, vat vzk_pozycjezinfo is view problem is in: sum(wvat-wvatp) where field in view wvat = 33.08 and wvatp = 36.09 Result is -3.010001 If I ask postgres manualy: select sum(33.08 - 36.09) result is ok -3.01 Now I fix it with round function but i think that is a bug. With regards Mirek ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [BUGS] BUG #3985: select command not working
On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 12:05:36PM +, srijit wrote: > > The following bug has been logged online: > > Bug reference: 3985 > Logged by: srijit > Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > PostgreSQL version: 8.1 > Operating system: windows xp sp2 > Description:select command not working > Details: > > i`ve installed Postgresql 8.1.i`m able to create databases and tables > but wen i try to view the contents of a table i get a message called "more > is not a recognised internal command"., this has happened in many of my > friends PCs also. i request u to kindly give us a solution to this > prob. > > i`ve used the following statements > > create user srijit with password 'admin'; > CREATE ROLE > > create database mydb owner srijit; > DATABASE CREATED > > \c mydb srijit; > password for srijit:admin > > create table tab1(sno integer); > table created > > insert into tab1 values(10); > INSERT 0 1 > > select * from tab1; > 'more' is not a recognised internal or external command That's interesting, indeed. AFAIK all windows versions ever has had a more.com available - it shuold bei n your SYSTEM32 directory. Please check if it's there, and if it could be the permissions on the file that are somehow broken? If you don't have it or it's somehow broken in a differnt way, you can run the command: \pset pager in psql, to turn off the usage of the pager. You'll then of course not get a pager, but you should get your data. //Magnus ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
