ERROR: duplicate key violates unique
constraint "pg_class_oid_index"
I found a post earlier but wanted to post up my
info as the other persons did not look like the same type of error:
I tried to cluster the isbn_table
cluster isbn_index_code on
isbn_table;ERROR: duplicate key violat
On Tue, 2004-08-17 at 00:43, My Thi Ho wrote:
> Hi,
> I am working on a project which explore postgresql to store multimedia
> data. In details, i am trying to work with the buffer management part
> of postgres source code. I had search on the web but could not find much
> usefull information.
On Aug 20, 2004, at 3:18 PM, Joe Lester wrote:
Huh. Cool. Do you have any experience of what the performance hit
would be for using pgpool?
I've only had performance increases with pgpool. Then again, my
connections are common of web apps (as web apps connect) - many many
short lived connectio
Over the past week, we have bundled and released new versions of 7.2, 7.3
and 7.4 to address a couple of potentially critical bugs that were
recently identified.
For all three versions, these releases address the following:
* Prevent possible loss of committed transactions during crash
Thomas F.O'Connell wrote:
Since the current stable version of postgres (7.4.x) doesn't
allow cross-datatype comparisons of indexes, is it always
necessary to cast my application data explicitly in order for an
index to be used, even among the integer types?
E.g., If I have a table with a bigint pri
I can think of at least three workarounds in 7.4:
1. Always quote your constants:
... WHERE bigintcol = '42';
You can also
WHERE bigintcol = 42::bigint
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
2. Use a prepared statement:
PREPARE foo(bigint) AS ... WHERE bigintcol = $1;
EXECUTE foo(42)
Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Thomas F.O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Since the current stable version of postgres (7.4.x) doesn't allow
>> cross-datatype comparisons of indexes, is it always necessary to cast
>> my application data explicitly in order for an index to
Julian Scarfe wrote:
> Any views on when an 8.0 release is likely? I appreciate that it will
> depend on beta testing but any insight into current intentions would
> be helpful for a deployment decision over the next few days/weeks.
Well, you know the official answer, but inofficially I can tell y
On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 16:41:40 -0400,
"Thomas F.O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since the current stable version of postgres (7.4.x) doesn't allow
> cross-datatype comparisons of indexes, is it always necessary to cast
> my application data explicitly in order for an index to be used,
Since the current stable version of postgres (7.4.x) doesn't allow
cross-datatype comparisons of indexes, is it always necessary to cast
my application data explicitly in order for an index to be used, even
among the integer types?
E.g., If I have a table with a bigint primary key and applicati
If you supply the following:
1. The schema (including available indexes) for each table in the query
2. The actual query
3. The row counts for the tables via select count(*)
I suspect that someone can formulate a query that is as fast as you
need.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PRO
On Aug 20, 2004, at 3:01 PM, Bill Moran wrote:
Please don't wrap machine-generated output ... it makes it VERY
difficult
to understand.
This is usually caused by a setting in your mail client that reads
something like "wrap lines at 72 characters" being turned on.
You should wrap your text at 72 c
On Fri, 2004-08-20 at 16:46, Oleg wrote:
> Dear All,
> I have upgraded Postgresql from 7.3 to 7.4.
> Starting pg brings error:
> The database is in an older format that cannot be read by version 7.4 of
> PostgreSQL
>
> dpkg-upgrade postgresql fails
> I tried postgresql-dump. While dumping it brin
Joe Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> And it's common for the clients to stay running for days at a time. I'd
> say the average length of a connection is 3 days.
Uh-huh. Can you do anything to increase that?
Another possibility for slowing the leakage rate (pending a real fix)
is to decrease
Joe Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If these clients aren't utilizing the database, it might be worthwhile
> > to have them disconnect after a period of inactivity, and reconnect
> > when
> > things get busy again.
>
> That's a good idea, except in the future, all the clients will be
> ac
On Aug 20, 2004, at 2:43 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Bill Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joe Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm wondering, however, if you have a connection leak instead. i.e.
is it possible that your client application is opening a whole bunch
of connections and never closing them?
Shelby Cain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On a hunch, I turned fsync off and the performance
> jumped up to around the same performance I was getting
> running the cygwin 7.4.x port.
Ah-hah. The win32 hackers should confirm this, but my recollection is
that sync/fsync are no-ops under Cygwin (one
Bill Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Joe Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I'm wondering, however, if you have a connection leak instead. i.e.
>>> is it possible that your client application is opening a whole bunch
>>> of connections and never closing them?
>>
>> No. The clients open onl
--- Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Shelby Cain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > From looking at vacuum.c I gathered
> vacuum_cost_delay
> > must be >0 to enable the feature - correct?
>
> Yeah, that's right --- delay=0 turns it off. Weird.
> Can anyone else
> reproduce the problem?
>
On
On Aug 20, 2004, at 2:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I think what you've found is an OS X bug.
I was able to replicate this behavior on OS X 10.3.5. All I did was
start the postmaster and then start a continuous loop in a shell
window:
while true
do
psql -c "select count(*) from tenk1" regression
do
Hi,
what does that line from my logfile mean?
Adding missing FROM-clause entry for table "customer"
Would pg change my SQL queries on the fly?
TIA
/Ulrich
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if y
On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 09:43:08 +0200,
Daniel Martini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> No he can't:
> Only if he is able to install a program on the webserver to
> actually login with a hashed password. If he wants to log in over the
> cgi, this won't work, because the hashed value he gained by r
On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 16:47:55 +0800,
Robert Ngo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> copy swpparm from stdin using delimiters ';';
>
> exampaper;02;1;Bahasa Melayu;M;A;2002-11-27;system;;
>
> \.
>
> why does the above command return a error message
It looks like the column that is associated with
Marek Lewczuk wrote:
Hello,
I have a query, which is quite big and there is a huge difference
between execution time in MySQL and PostgreSQL. I think that I have made
all possible steps to increase the speed of the query, but unfortunately
it is still about 100 times slower. I'm out of ideas wh
Hi John,
but how long is the exclusive lock taken? For the whole transaction?
My jobs are quite big, and transactions usually take several minutes.
I can not afford have all my other jobs stalled for that time.
Ulrich
I believe foreign key constraints take an exclusive lock on the parent.
If you a
I believe foreign key constraints take an exclusive lock on the parent.
If you are inserting two child records that reference the same parent
(at the same time) one insert will block.
John Sidney-Woollett
Ulrich Wisser wrote:
Hi,
after some more debugging I found that my application does on aver
Hi Igor,
wouldn't
select g_name,count(*),sum(u_act) from g1 join users using(g_id)
group by g_name
do the job?
/Ulrich
Result can be obtained by:
SELECT g1.g_name,
(select count(*) from users u1 where g1.g_id = u1.g_id) as users_count,
(select count(*) from users u2 where g1.g_id = u2.g_id and u_ac
Do you mean
create view MyView as
select * from table1
union
select * from table2;
John Sidney-Woollett
Otto Blomqvist wrote:
Hello !
I have a couple of tables with the same schema that I would like to
query and view as one table. I looked into CREATE VIEW and FULL JOINs
but still can't figure out
> I guess you know where it ends--the index is not used for IS [NOT] NULL
> expressions. The obvious workaround was to add DEFAULT value to
> "processed" in form of kind of anchor (we used '-infinity')
Wouldn't it have worked to add an index
... WHERE processed IS NULL
and go from there ?
Hello,
I have a query, which is quite big and there is a huge difference
between execution time in MySQL and PostgreSQL. I think that I have made
all possible steps to increase the speed of the query, but unfortunately
it is still about 100 times slower. I'm out of ideas what to do next,
so ma
Hello,
is this version ftp://ftp.postgresql.org/pub/src/7.4.5/ stable release ???
thanx
--
[ miso hlavac ][ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ][ http://www.medium13.sk ]
[ icq:94900232 ][ callto://hlavki ]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists
Mark Gibson wrote:
Hi,
I'm having intermittent problems connecting to my PostgreSQL database
from PHP, using Kerberos credentials forwarded from mod_auth_kerb.
[snip]
The trouble is that sometimes the connection works,
and sometimes it doesn't. It's very unpredictable. :(
Oh, I forgot to mention
Richard Huxton wrote:
Where you don't have a valid date to store you should use NULL. This
business of storing zeroes is a horrible MySQL design mistake.
Well, yes and no. It certainly is a design mistake and introduces
incosistency into the database, but after I was bitten several times by
NULL
Hi,
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004, Richard Huxton wrote:
Emi Lu wrote:
Hello all,
I have a question about "date" & "timestamp" types in PostgreSQL. I want
to setup the default value '-00-00' and "-00-00 00:00:00" for
them. However, it seems that PostgreSQL does not support it. Could someone
helps
Kevin Matthews wrote:
subscribe end
i am getting this error
org.apache.jasper.JasperException: ERROR: current transaction is
aborted, queries ignored until end of transaction block
It appears an error has occurred in your current transaction, which has
caused it to abort. Until you issue a ROLLBA
Emi Lu wrote:
Hello all,
I have a question about "date" & "timestamp" types in PostgreSQL. I want
to setup the default value '-00-00' and "-00-00 00:00:00" for
them. However, it seems that PostgreSQL does not support it. Could
someone helps me please?
PostgreSQL doesn't and almost certai
Hi,
Citing Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Daniel Martini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Now how would this work, if it would be possible to send hashed passwords
> > from libpq:
> > user sends username/password, this gets hashed by the cgi, then the hashed
> > value is sent by libpq. Session id
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
> I have a couple of tables with the same schema that I would like to
> query and view as one table. I looked into CREATE VIEW and FULL JOINs
> but still can't figure out a good (fast) way of doing this..
It depends on the specific way you want t
Hi,
after some more debugging I found that my application does on average 3
inserts per second. Which is not very fast, but fast enough for now. But
now and then the whole insert proces will be stalled and drop to 0.1
inserts per second. In the output of "ps aux Op" I see postgres in the
state
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004, Emi Lu wrote:
Hello all,
I have a question about "date" & "timestamp" types in PostgreSQL. I want to
setup the default value '-00-00' and "-00-00 00:00:00" for them.
However, it seems that PostgreSQL does not support it. Could someone helps me
please?
how about using
40 matches
Mail list logo
