Re: PG11.2 - wal_level =minimal max_wal_senders = 0

Thanks, I currently have the systems running a parallel pg_dump each night to a separate partition mounted on the VM. Then I perform a full backup of the VM and all mounted drives each night. Would this be affected by disabling wal archiving? I noted that I understood wal archiving was affected

Re: pg_restore issues with intarray

On 9/6/19 8:45 AM, Kevin Brannen wrote: From: Adrian Klaver On 9/5/19 5:05 PM, Kevin Brannen wrote: It feels like the restore is adding the intarray extension, which does a CREATE OPERATOR FAMILY on its own, then later the restore does CREATE OPERATOR FAMILY on again causing the problem. Yet

RE: pg_restore issues with intarray

>From: Jerry Sievers > > >Try running \dx+ for intarray on one of your deviant systems. You may find >the item pg_dump is trying to be explicit about *missing* from the extension >member list. > >In such a case, see the ALTER EXTENSION ADD... which can be run manually to >register whatever is

RE: pg_restore issues with intarray

>From: Adrian Klaver >On 9/5/19 5:05 PM, Kevin Brannen wrote: >> >> It feels like the restore is adding the intarray extension, which does >> a CREATE OPERATOR FAMILY on its own, then later the restore does >> CREATE OPERATOR FAMILY on again causing the problem. Yet this doesn't >> happen on most

RE: pg_restore issues with intarray

>From: Jerry Sievers > >>Kevin Brannen writes: >> >> It feels like the restore is adding the intarray extension, which does >> a CREATE OPERATOR FAMILY on its own, then later the restore does >> CREATE OPERATOR FAMILY on again causing the problem. Yet this doesn't >> happen on most of our

RE: SQL equivalint of #incude directive ?

> From: stan > > I thought this would be common. But a quick Google only revealed what look to > be workarounds. > > I am defining a bunch of functions, and I would prefer to store them in a > separate file, which then gets "source" by the main DB init file. > > Is there a standard way to do

Bad estimates on GIN bigint[] index

Le 03/09/2019 à 15:43, Tom Lane a écrit : "Arnaud L." writes: -> Bitmap Index Scan on planet_osm_ways_nodes_idx (cost=0.00..11190.36 rows=1420982 width=0) (actual time=0.268..0.268 rows=1 loops=1) Index Cond: (nodes && '{1}'::bigint[]) The planner should be able to do better

RE: Primary Key Update issue ?

På fredag 06. september 2019 kl. 11:25:36, skrev Patrick FICHE < patrick.fi...@aqsacom.com >: Hi Andreas, Thanks a lot for your answer, which solves this case. I was still a bit surprised as this is linked to transaction management while I have here a single

RE: Primary Key Update issue ?

Hi Andreas, Thanks a lot for your answer, which solves this case. I was still a bit surprised as this is linked to transaction management while I have here a single statement until I saw the Compatibility Remark in documentation : Also, PostgreSQL checks non-deferrable uniqueness constraints

Sv: Primary Key Update issue ?

På fredag 06. september 2019 kl. 11:06:04, skrev Patrick FICHE < patrick.fi...@aqsacom.com >: Hello, While doing some testing on a Postgresql database, I encountered a strange behavior which is very simple to reproduce. I just wanted to know if this is

Primary Key Update issue ?

Hello, While doing some testing on a Postgresql database, I encountered a strange behavior which is very simple to reproduce. I just wanted to know if this is expected behavior or if it should be considered as an issue. The scenario to reproduce it is the following. CREATE TABLE Test ( pKey

Re: PG11.2 - wal_level =minimal max_wal_senders = 0

Hi, Make sure that the new settings of wal_level and max_wal_senders don't interfere with your backup strategy. The two parameters have an impact on wal archiving as well. Ben. Le jeu. 5 sept. 2019 à 08:33, Luca Ferrari a écrit : > On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 10:44 PM Jason Ralph > wrote: > > > >

Seeking New Members for the Community Code of Conduct Committee

This message is being sent from the Community Code of Conduct Committee, with the approval of the Core Team. The PostgreSQL Community Code of Conduct Committee is approaching our first year anniversary. As part of the Community CoC policy, the Committee membership is to be refreshed on an