Thanks Laurenz Albe for reply.
Unfortunately this index is only frequently used during a certain period of
time(such as 9:30am - 12:00am) .I usually encounter slow load of this index
during some other time.
Then it seems to me the only answer for this case would be the pgprewarm and
pg_cron ?
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 12:45:35PM +1000, raf wrote:
> Since the backup itself was from a 9.5.12 server, it
> seems that the 9.6 parameter, idle_in_transaction_session_timeout,
> must have been set by the 9.6 client even though it was
> connected to a 9.5 server. Is that expected behaviour?
Yes,
Hi,
macos-10.11.6
postgresql-9.5.16 (server)
postgresql-9.6.12 (client)
I've just rebooted my macos laptop for the first time in months
and have started having a problem loading database backups there.
I get this error output:
pg_restore: [archiver (db)] Error while INITIALIZING:
On 8/12/19 1:07 PM, stan wrote:
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 12:14:25PM -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 8/12/19 10:51 AM, stan wrote:
I have a customer requirement/desire. The system is (among other things)
essentially a employee time sheet. The manager wants for an employee to not
be able to modify
On 8/12/19 10:51 AM, stan wrote:
I have a customer requirement/desire. The system is (among other things)
essentially a employee time sheet. The manager wants for an employee to not
be able to modify a given row in the table they enter time into once it is
committed. I personally see issues with
I have a customer requirement/desire. The system is (among other things)
essentially a employee time sheet. The manager wants for an employee to not
be able to modify a given row in the table they enter time into once it is
committed. I personally see issues with this, but I am willing to try to
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:40:20AM -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> On 8/12/19 10:30 AM, stan wrote:
> > > > The task_instance table is the one the original question was in
> > > > reference
> > > > to.
> > > >
> > > > CREATE TABLE employee (
> > > > employee_keyinteger DEFAULT
>
On 8/12/19 10:30 AM, stan wrote:
The task_instance table is the one the original question was in reference
to.
CREATE TABLE employee (
employee_keyinteger DEFAULT nextval('employee_key_serial')
PRIMARY KEY ,
id varchar(5) NOT NULL UNIQUE ,
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:16:41AM -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> On 8/12/19 10:06 AM, stan wrote:
> > Cc: pgsql-general.lists.postgresql@panix.com
> > Subject: Re: constrain with MATCH full and NULL values in referenced table
> > User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15)
> > X-Editor: gVim
> >
> >
Hi all.
PostgeewSQL 11.4 on Centos 7.
I created a test bed on VirtualBox and test HA cluster by random failures in
loop. Sometime, in case of longest switching from failure, I get strange
behaviour. The walreceiver is stopped by timeout, but don't restarted for 2
hours. May be I agree with
On 8/12/19 10:06 AM, stan wrote:
Cc: pgsql-general.lists.postgresql@panix.com
Subject: Re: constrain with MATCH full and NULL values in referenced table
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15)
X-Editor: gVim
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 06:22:54PM +0200, Francisco Olarte wrote:
Stan:
On Mon, Aug
Cc: pgsql-general.lists.postgresql@panix.com
Subject: Re: constrain with MATCH full and NULL values in referenced table
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15)
X-Editor: gVim
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 06:22:54PM +0200, Francisco Olarte wrote:
> Stan:
>
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:11 PM stan
Stan:
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:11 PM stan wrote:
>
> I am creating a table that has 2 values in it which are keys pointing to 2
> other tables. I need for the UNIQUE combination of these 2 keys to exist in
> a fourth table. It has been recommended to use a foreign key constraint with
> the
On 8/12/19 8:51 AM, stan wrote:
Please reply to list also.
Ccing list.
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 08:17:33AM -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 8/12/19 8:11 AM, stan wrote:
I am creating a table that has 2 values in it which are keys pointing to 2
other tables. I need for the UNIQUE combination of
Dear PostgreSQL Community Members,
I am a master student based at the University of Leeds (UK), and currently
working on a research investigating the relationships between open source
software community culture, governance and structure, motivation of
participation and the innovation
stan writes:
> I am creating a table that has 2 values in it which are keys pointing to 2
> other tables. I need for the UNIQUE combination of these 2 keys to exist in
> a fourth table. It has been recommended to use a foreign key constraint with
> the MATCH FULL parameter.
> Here is my
On 8/12/19 8:11 AM, stan wrote:
I am creating a table that has 2 values in it which are keys pointing to 2
other tables. I need for the UNIQUE combination of these 2 keys to exist in
a fourth table. It has been recommended to use a foreign key constraint with
the MATCH FULL parameter.
Without
I am creating a table that has 2 values in it which are keys pointing to 2
other tables. I need for the UNIQUE combination of these 2 keys to exist in
a fourth table. It has been recommended to use a foreign key constraint with
the MATCH FULL parameter.
Here is my question, does this deal with
On 8/12/19 2:57 PM, Shital A wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> Postgres version : 9.6
> OS:Rhel 7.6
>
> We are working on HA setup for postgres cluster of two nodes in active-passive
> mode.
>
> Installed:
> Pacemaker 1.1.19
> Corosync 2.4.3
>
> The pacemaker agent with this installation doesn't
Hello,
Postgres version : 9.6
OS:Rhel 7.6
We are working on HA setup for postgres cluster of two nodes in
active-passive mode.
Installed:
Pacemaker 1.1.19
Corosync 2.4.3
The pacemaker agent with this installation doesn't support automatic
failback. What I mean by that is explained below:
1.
James(王旭) wrote:
> As the title,How to keep a specific index in memory gracefully?
>
> After some statistical query, I can determine that not all indexes can be fit
> into memory,
> but one of the most frequently used indexes(say idx_xyz) can be definitely
> fit into
> memory(specifically ,[the
> Best practice for this sort of thing is considered to be to run the two
> Postgres instances under different user IDs. That avoids them thinking
> that the other one's lock files are relevant, and it provides an extra
> layer of security against possible conflicts between the two instances.
>
Hello:
As the title,How to keep a specific index in memory gracefully?
After some statistical query, I can determine that not all indexes can be fit
into memory, but one of the most frequently used indexes(say idx_xyz) can be
definitely fit into memory(specifically ,[the size of idx_xyz]=20%
Shiwangini Shishulkar wrote:
> Any way to reduce backup size of postgres backups or it's default behavior of
> postgres to take backups which are double in size?
The smallest backup would be a compressed custom format "pg_dump":
pg_dump -F c -Z 9 ...
I is very unusual for a custom format
Hi,
Here , we have first tried with .BAK backups. For, 43GB database-> the
backup size was ~86GB.
Then, I configured backup with .sql file. Here it was ~70GB for the same
database size.
Next, now our database size keeps increasing. As well as backup size is
also increasing. Now, backup size is
25 matches
Mail list logo
