On Thu, Jun 6, 2019, 8:19 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Francisco Olarte writes:
> > On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 6:57 PM Kelly, Kevin wrote:
> >> We’re attempting to launch postgres via systemd and noticing that when
> invoking via systemctl start postgres.service the prompt never returns. If
> we switch to
Francisco Olarte writes:
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 6:57 PM Kelly, Kevin wrote:
>> We’re attempting to launch postgres via systemd and noticing that when
>> invoking via systemctl start postgres.service the prompt never returns. If
>> we switch to another tty and check the status it shows as:
>>
Thank you all - Karsten, Benjamin, Pavel, PostgreSql team,
I've discussed all your inputs with our developers and they came with a
solution for this problem, which was already agreed (on a high level) by our
auditor.
I am adding it here so it can inspire the others, when potentially getting in
On 6/6/19 8:12 AM, Steve Rogerson wrote:
On 06/06/2019 14:35, Adrian Klaver wrote:
Ok - on it's way - in the mean time - what does "record type has not been
registered" mean?
Difficult to be definitive without knowing what "timestamp" actually is.
A vague answer is that whatever you define
On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 08:48, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Andres has
> suggested that I work on variable-width table identifiers in nbtree
> for the benefit of pluggable storage engines, but I don't have much
> enthusiasm for the idea of doing that without delivering a clear
> benefit to users in the
On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 10:03 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> If you are saying that you think that Postgres should support primary
> keys that don't necessarily overlap partition keys, then I agree with
> you. Please send a patch to implement that capability.
FWIW, I could probably be convinced to wo
On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 at 18:03, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> On 2019-Jun-06, Alex V. wrote:
>
> > I think that your position about primary keys in partitional tables is
> > not right.
> >
> > If we see regular table, one-field primary key is cross-table unique.
> > In partitional tables for users view we
Thanks for reaching out Francisco. Here's some relevant information related to
your questions.
Here's the service we're running (removed superfluous stuff like comments):
[Unit]
Description=PostgreSQL 10 database server
Documentation=https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/
After=syslog.targe
On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 6:57 PM Kelly, Kevin wrote:
> We’re attempting to launch postgres via systemd and noticing that when
> invoking via systemctl start postgres.service the prompt never returns. If we
> switch to another tty and check the status it shows as:
> Active: activating (start) since
Hi All,
We are using the following format for LDAP authentication,
hostall all 0.0.0.0/0 ldap ldapserver=ldap.xxx.com
ldapport=389
ldaptls=1 ldapbasedn="dc=domain,dc=com"
ldapbinddn="cn=auth_user,dc=domain,dc=com"
ldapbindpasswd=encrypted_password ldapsearchattribute=uid
1. It
On 2019-Jun-06, Alex V. wrote:
> I think that your position about primary keys in partitional tables is
> not right.
>
> If we see regular table, one-field primary key is cross-table unique.
> In partitional tables for users view we MUST also seen unique
> one-field primary key because this is us
Hello,
We're attempting to launch postgres via systemd and noticing that when invoking
via systemctl start postgres.service the prompt never returns. If we switch to
another tty and check the status it shows as:
Active: activating (start) since Thu 2019-06-06 09:36:32 EDT; 12min ago
If we chang
>> CREATE TABLE public.test1 (
>> x1 integer NOT NULL,
>> x2 integer NOT NULL,
>> CONSTRAINT test1_pkey PRIMARY KEY (x1) INCLUDE(x2)
>> ) PARTITION BY RANGE (x2);
>> This query works in 11.1 but fails in 11.3 with messages:
>> ERROR: insufficient columns in PRIMARY KEY constraint d
On 2019-Jun-06, Steve Rogerson wrote:
> On 06/06/2019 14:35, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> > On 6/6/19 4:02 AM, Steve Rogerson wrote:
> >> I've just updated my laptop to pg11 and I'm getting a problem. I'm trying
> >> to
> >> keeps the details confidential, so somewhat vague I'm afraid.
> >>
> >> sjr_l
I've used PostgreSQL in a variety of commercial projects now for 10 years
or so. It's been a delight! During this time, we've never needed any
support, nor paid for anything.
Recently, I've started thinking about and discussing with others the idea
of making a recurring payment in support of the p
On 06/06/2019 14:35, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> On 6/6/19 4:02 AM, Steve Rogerson wrote:
>> I've just updated my laptop to pg11 and I'm getting a problem. I'm trying to
>> keeps the details confidential, so somewhat vague I'm afraid.
>>
>> sjr_local1db=> select count(*) from user_passwords ;
>> ERROR:
Hi, I wrote a WIX bootstrapper to download
"postgresql-9.6.13-1-windows-x64.exe" / "pgadmin4-4.6-x86.exe" and to install
it from the bootstrapper, and it looks like this:
However, when I ran the bootstrapper, it failed with the following errors
during postgresql exe download (the same error als
Now that it is established that CREATE DATABASE does not
verify checksums on the template I have a followup question.
The current canonical solution (?) for verifying checksums in
an existing database is, to may understanding, to pg_dump it
(to /dev/null, perhaps):
pg_dump --username=...
On 6/6/19 4:02 AM, Steve Rogerson wrote:
I've just updated my laptop to pg11 and I'm getting a problem. I'm trying to
keeps the details confidential, so somewhat vague I'm afraid.
sjr_local1db=> select count(*) from user_passwords ;
ERROR: record type has not been registered
sjr_local1db=> in
I've just updated my laptop to pg11 and I'm getting a problem. I'm trying to
keeps the details confidential, so somewhat vague I'm afraid.
sjr_local1db=> select count(*) from user_passwords ;
ERROR: record type has not been registered
sjr_local1db=> insert into user_passwords (name, "timestamp"
Hi Domen,
On 05/06/2019 14:46, Domen Šetar wrote:
> Systemctl shows that database is dead, but it is actually running.
>
> Can someone explain this behavioure?
As others pointed out - this is due to bypassing of systemd altogether
in order to start the database proces. If you check the configura
On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 11:41:40AM +0700, Benjamin Scherrey wrote:
> You should never store such information
> in a database product unless you plan of decommissioning ALL of the media
> that stores the information once you're supposed to lose custody.
Use a tablespace on a dedicated disk.
Move
22 matches
Mail list logo
