On ons, 2012-05-30 at 23:43 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
On 30.5.2012 23:19, Tom Lane wrote:
I suspect it depends on how you install the new version of the library,
too. I would somewhat expect it to work as you're thinking if the
install consists of rename old file out of the way, copy new
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 3:29 AM, Andrzej Krawiec
a.kraw...@focustelecom.pl wrote:
Ok, we've managed to do strace -s during such a situation (see
attached file). I have no clue what can it mean. Only errors count is
quite strange.
How long was strace -s run for to generate this?
Could this
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:48 PM, junho1@lge.com wrote:
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 6659
Logged by: Junho Kim
Email address: junho1@lge.com
PostgreSQL version: 9.0.4
Operating system: Windows XP 32bit ServicePack 3
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Chris Ruprecht ch...@cdrbill.com wrote:
Hi Robert,
I was compiling 9.2beta1 - but that wasn't an option when submitting the
issue.
I can compile the 9.1.x versions just fine.
Below is a list of the uuid.h files on the system.
It appears, that the file
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:34:16PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
My point is that plpython_call_handler is defined in the public and
pg_catalog schema, as are other language handlers.
In fact, an argument could be made that the bug is really in pg_dump.
When we moved the language handlers
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 6671
Logged by: Ed Muller
Email address: edw...@heroku.com
PostgreSQL version: 9.0.7
Operating system: Linux (Ubuntu 10.04)
Description:
We have this thing where we kill the restore command sometimes,
Why is cost_hashjoin estimating 50 billion tuple comparisons for 10K rows of
output though?
From: Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us
To: postgresu...@yahoo.com
Cc: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 10:03 PM
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #6668:
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 6669
Logged by: jose soares
Email address: jose.soa...@sferacarta.com
PostgreSQL version: 8.4.8
Operating system: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, debian
Description:
Hi,
I think I have found an error in pg or at
Hi Robert,
I did some experimenting.
I have uuid.h from the OSSP uuid page, version 1.6.2 installed.
Removed /usr/local/include/uuid.h
rebuilt and re-installed the package.
Same error - but also in 9.1.
So I copied /usr/include/uuid/uuid.h to /usr/local/include/uuid.h and the error
went away:
Ok, we've managed to do strace -s during such a situation (see
attached file). I have no clue what can it mean. Only errors count is
quite strange.
Could this
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/high-CPU-usage-for-stats-collector-in-8-2-td1962590.html
affect our environment?
--
Andrzej
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 6670
Logged by: Roman
Email address: byg...@mail.ua
PostgreSQL version: Unsupported/Unknown
Operating system: Win32
Description:
Bruce, tell me PLEASE how make this in 7.3:
SELECT t.oid,
On 05/31/2012 11:53 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:34:16PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
OK, so what do people want me to do on this? Apply my pg_upgrade fix or
go for a more general fix that will prevent pg_dump from dumping out
these duplicate functions --- it would
Adrian Klaver adrian.kla...@gmail.com writes:
On 05/31/2012 11:53 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:34:16PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
OK, so what do people want me to do on this? Apply my pg_upgrade fix or
go for a more general fix that will prevent pg_dump from dumping
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 06:24:04PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Adrian Klaver adrian.kla...@gmail.com writes:
On 05/31/2012 11:53 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:34:16PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
OK, so what do people want me to do on this? Apply my pg_upgrade fix or
go
Postgres User postgresu...@yahoo.com writes:
Why is cost_hashjoin estimating 50 billion tuple comparisons for 10K rows of
output though?
Well, if it hashes the smaller table, there's 100 million rows on the
outside, and each of them will probe one hash chain in the hash table.
If you're
edw...@heroku.com writes:
We have this thing where we kill the restore command sometimes, to ensure
it's not stuck.
Um, what makes you think that's a good idea?
This has rarely led to postmaster dying afterwards instead of retrying.
Rarely? As I read the code, it will happen every single
On 05/31/2012 03:30 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 06:24:04PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Hm, I'm not sure about that. The general charter of pg_dump is to
produce a dump that will replicate the state of the database.
Editorializing on it in order to make it more likely to
On 31 May 2012 14:14, Edmund Horner ejr...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello, apologies if this is already in your radar.
I can successfully install the PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1 binaries on
Windows XP and successfully perform most queries. However I've run
into some trouble with the XML support.
From a
On 1 June 2012 12:14, Edmund Horner ejr...@gmail.com wrote:
I tried using an older libxml2.dll. Replace with the one from
ftp://ftp.zlatkovic.com/libxml/oldreleases/libxml2-2.6.9.win32.zip
(and copying zlib1.dll to zlib.dll), and it works.
I note that the previous 9.1.3 binaries used the
On 1 June 2012 12:36, Edmund Horner ejr...@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 June 2012 12:14, Edmund Horner ejr...@gmail.com wrote:
I tried using an older libxml2.dll. Replace with the one from
ftp://ftp.zlatkovic.com/libxml/oldreleases/libxml2-2.6.9.win32.zip
(and copying zlib1.dll to zlib.dll), and it
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 6672
Logged by: Anna Zaks
Email address: zaks.a...@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 9.1.3
Operating system: MacOSX
Description:
There are two memory leaks in dumputils (v9.2.0beta1):
1)
File:
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 06:30:30PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Hm, I'm not sure about that. The general charter of pg_dump is to
produce a dump that will replicate the state of the database.
Editorializing on it in order to make it more likely to reload in a
different version of PG seems
jose.soa...@sferacarta.com writes:
I think I have found an error in pg or at least inconsistency, take a look
at this.
I created an unique index on two columns and pg let me enter repeated values
as NULLs (unknown value),
This is entirely correct per SQL standard: unique constraints do not
zaks.a...@gmail.com writes:
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 6672
Logged by: Anna Zaks
Email address: zaks.a...@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 9.1.3
Operating system: MacOSX
Description:
There are two memory leaks in dumputils
24 matches
Mail list logo
