On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Jeff Frost wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
Jeff Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Why does it request it twice?
I think the reason is that the rollforward cycle is
fetch next segment into RECOVERYXLOG
process segment
unlink RECOVERYX
Jeff Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That all seems reasonable enough. Is it in the docs somewhere? I
> didn't find anything like this mentioned. If not, could we get it
> added as a note?
Yeah, it hadn't occurred to anyone to specify this, because we just
thought of recovery_command as fet
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
Jeff Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Why does it request it twice?
I think the reason is that the rollforward cycle is
fetch next segment into RECOVERYXLOG
process segment
unlink RECOVERYXLOG
and only when the "fetch" step fails
Jeff Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why does it request it twice?
I think the reason is that the rollforward cycle is
fetch next segment into RECOVERYXLOG
process segment
unlink RECOVERYXLOG
and only when the "fetch" step fails does it realize it's done. So then
it
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
Jeff Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
It seems like everything is happy, except it seems to ask for the 4F
log file more than once.
IIRC that's standard procedure. Is there a reason your recovery_command
can't support it?
Really? If that's the case, t
Jeff Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It seems like everything is happy, except it seems to ask for the 4F
> log file more than once.
IIRC that's standard procedure. Is there a reason your recovery_command
can't support it?
regards, tom lane
--
Hi guys, I've inherited a PITR continuous recovery master/standby server pair.
The continuous recovery and loading of the xlogs seems to work fine, but when
I opted to test the replica bring up, it falls over with signal 6.
Here's an excerpt from the log with log levels set up to debug5:
DEBUG
>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 8:51 AM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jayaram Bhat"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> can it possiable to uses Postgresql in windows. From where i will verions
> for that
That was rather off-topic for the thread -- you should have started a new
one.
Anyway, if I u
Doug Knight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In the config.log both build and host now say i686-pc-linux-gnu.
> However, under "checking for C compiler version" I see "Target:
> x86_64-redhat-linux". Should I be concerned about this wrt building a
> pure 32 bit postgreSQL? Also, later in the log, ther
OK. I ran configure as:
setarch i386 ./configure
In the config.log both build and host now say i686-pc-linux-gnu.
However, under "checking for C compiler version" I see "Target:
x86_64-redhat-linux". Should I be concerned about this wrt building a
pure 32 bit postgreSQL? Also, later in the log, t
Doug Knight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am running RHEL5 on a 64 bit platform. We want to test with a 32 bit
> version of PostgreSQL. Can someone point me to the configure switches
> needed to force a 32 bit build?
"setarch i386" will help.
regards, tom lane
-
Hi,
I am running RHEL5 on a 64 bit platform. We want to test with a 32 bit
version of PostgreSQL. Can someone point me to the configure switches
needed to force a 32 bit build?
Thanks,
Doug Knight
WSI Inc.
Andover, MA
can it possiable to uses Postgresql in windows. From where i will verions
for that
From: Ben Kim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: John R Allgood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] How to monitor resources on Linux.
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 08:17:12 -0500 (CDT)
On
On Wed, 29 Aug 2007, John R Allgood wrote:
I wish that was the case the linux version has to be installed locally.
I'm not an expert but I guess "local" may be a bit different in
virtualization.
If "local" requirement is from license or security issues, there are ways
to completely hide th
14 matches
Mail list logo
