Glen Eustace wrote:
Hi all,
I was wondering whether anyone has had any experience running postgresql
in a vm under ESx. VMware provides significant HA/DR oppurtunities and
we would like to use it if we can. The DBase would be on a EMC SAN
hosted LUN and the ESx servers would be dual Quad
Hi Andrew,
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 12:10 AM, Andrew Maeng [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks Dave. I can't seem to find the SQL user in the user accounts though.
All i can see is the asp.net machine account.
Look for a user called 'postgres', not SQL.
I'm guessing that this means that
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Ron Mayer wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 08:18 -0800, Ron Mayer wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
... harder to keep
up with the list traffic; so something is happening that a simple
volume
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Ron Mayer wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 08:18 -0800, Ron Mayer wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
... harder to keep
up with the list traffic; so something is happening
Glen Eustace escribió:
Generally speaking, virtualization allows you to take a bunch of low
powered servers and make them live in one big box saving money on
electricity and management. Generally speaking, database sers are big
powerful boxes with lots of hard disks and gigs upon gigs of ram
my standard query (adapted to 1mb size) is:
Thank you very much.
This query shows toast files in a cryptic way:
db_owner pg_toast pg_toast_40552_index
1352 kB
How to change it so that it shows also relation name whose data
pg_toast_40552_index contains?
It is not
it shows all except toast entries. for included values see
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/functions-admin.html#FUNCTIONS-ADMIN-DBSIZE
function |pg_total_relation_size|(oid)
Andrus schrieb:
my standard query (adapted to 1mb size) is:
Thank you very much.
This query shows toast
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 12:08:30PM -0700, Scott Marlowe wrote:
There are no character limits for sql statements in pgsql
That's what I thought!
However, I've just tried today and am getting some strange results. The
strange results are that above a certain length PG says that it's put a
string
Thomas,
it shows all except toast entries. for included values see
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/functions-admin.html#FUNCTIONS-ADMIN-DBSIZE
function |pg_total_relation_size|(oid)
I'm sorry I was not clear.
For my db your query returns row like
db_owner pg_toast
hola, soy nuevo en esto de postgre, pero ya tengo bastantes problemas,
empecemos por
partes, tengo una base e datos que almacena diariamente alrededor de 10
registros ,
(las trazas de los servicios de la red , ), y tengo una consulta que cuando la
mando a
ejecutar con php , me dice que
Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
However, I've just tried today and am getting some strange results. The
strange results are that above a certain length PG says that it's put a
string in OK but there's nothing there when I look back afterward.
I get out of memory complaints from psql when
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hola, soy nuevo en esto de postgre, pero ya tengo bastantes problemas,
empecemos por partes, tengo una base e datos que almacena diariamente
alrededor de 10 registros , (las trazas de los servicios de la red ,
), y tengo una consulta que cuando la mando a ejecutar
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 09:06:14AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
However, I've just tried today and am getting some strange results. The
strange results are that above a certain length PG says that it's put a
string in OK but there's nothing there when I look
I don't understand: is my question not clear, stupid, or you guys just
don't like me? ;)
Original Message
Subject:[Fwd: Re: [GENERAL] return MAX and when it happened]
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 08:48:44 -0600
From: Scara Maccai [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: postgresql
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
When I saw the manitou-mail.org stuff some days ago I was curious
-- how feasible would it be to host our web archives using a
database of some sort, instead of the current mbox-based Mhonarc
installation we use, which is so full of problems and limitations?
One
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 11:31 PM, Alvaro Herrera
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Daniel Verite wrote:
Gregory Stark wrote:
I would be curious to see the average lifespan of threads over time.
I happen to have the mail archives stored in a database, [...]
When I saw the manitou-mail.org
Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's a normal 32bit Intel Debian system, nothing much special done
to increase the kernel/user split or anything like that as far as I
remember on this box. If I try with larger sizes it falls over with
out of memory, but up until around 755MB (760MB fails)
Hi,
A client has a web system that uses ADODB for php, and that driver is
executing select version(), SET DATESTYLE TO 'ISO' and at least
one or two more statements a *lot* of times (almost 100 times in 3
hours, and this is just select version()), i tried to understand why
but it seems it is
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:45:42AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's a normal 32bit Intel Debian system, nothing much special done
to increase the kernel/user split or anything like that as far as I
remember on this box. If I try with larger sizes it falls
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 5:04 PM, Scott Marlowe [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
postgres -D ... | grep -v things I don't wanna see no more| grep -v
another thing I don't wanna see no more| rotatelogs filename 86400
or:
grep -Ev I don't wanna see you no more|and you too|and your cat too
;)
--
GJ
Sam Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:45:42AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Well, I can't reproduce that here. Something strange about your
configuration maybe?
Not that I know of. I've just created a test cluster to make sure and I
get the same behaviour.
Hmm ... the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Hmm ... the third machine I tried was able to reproduce the problem.
What it boils down to is lack of error checking in psql (not the
backend).
What is it about certain boxes that causes the failure, but not on others?
- --
Greg Sabino
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Jaime Casanova
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
A client has a web system that uses ADODB for php, and that driver is
executing select version(), SET DATESTYLE TO 'ISO' and at least
one or two more statements a *lot* of times (almost 100 times in 3
hours, and
Greg Sabino Mullane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What it boils down to is lack of error checking in psql (not the
backend).
What is it about certain boxes that causes the failure, but not on others?
It's a matter of having the out-of-memory condition occur just at the
wrong step, ie, the output
What is the error message you are getting. What is the interval you have set
for scheduling the job.
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 23:51:46 -0800From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [ADMIN] PgAgent
Job Scehduler is NOT runningTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dear all,I installed PgAgent and started
No error message appeared. Because statistics is available for the job. It
reflects that it is not running.
From: Vishal Arora [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008
I have just imported 3636 rows into a PG database table (PG 8.1 on CentOS 5.2
... the default).
The rows were imported using separate INSERT statements for each row. All OK so
far.
After having had a few attempts at inserting new test rows (which all inserted
OK), I notice that the last_value
No error message appeared. Because NOstatistics is available for the job. It
reflects that it is not running.
- Forwarded Message
From: Vishal Arora [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 11:47:33
am Tue, dem 25.11.2008, um 16:41:43 +0930 mailte Mike Hall folgendes:
I have just imported 3636 rows into a PG database table (PG 8.1 on CentOS 5.2
... the default).
The rows were imported using separate INSERT statements for each row. All OK
so far.
After having had a few attempts at
Hi dear Postgres users.
I have performance issues if I do the following pseudo-query:
SELECT a, b, (SELECT count(*) FROM t2 WHERE something) AS c
FROM t1 ORDER BY a LIMIT 10;
After some tests, it seems to me that the subquery on t2 is computed for all
rows of t1. As I don't ORDER BY c, there is
am Tue, dem 25.11.2008, um 15:34:57 +0800 mailte Guillaume Bog folgendes:
Hi dear Postgres users.
I have performance issues if I do the following pseudo-query:
SELECT a, b, (SELECT count(*) FROM t2 WHERE something) AS c
FROM t1 ORDER BY a LIMIT 10;
After some tests, it seems to me that
31 matches
Mail list logo
