Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Ben Chobot be...@silentmedia.com wrote:
On Fri, 6 Mar 2009, Greg Smith wrote:
On Fri, 6 Mar 2009, Tom Lane wrote:
Otherwise you need to reconfigure your drive to not cache writes.
I forget the incantation for that but it's in the PG
On Thu, 2009-03-12 at 12:57 -0700, Glen Parker wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Glen Parker glene...@nwlink.com writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
... AFAICS what
Glen is proposing is to not WAL-log index changes, and with that any
crash no matter how minor would have to invalidate indexes.
Nooo...!
Between google searches and my own experiments, I can't find any way to
actually make this work.
I have a TEXT[] column, and one of the values I want to insert is
'text for you'.
Is there no way to do this using the {} syntax? Chronicled below are
several of my attempts (various noise has been
Hello
try
postgres=# SELECT ARRAY['text for you some'];
array
---
{text \for you\ some}
(1 row)
regards
Pavel Stehule
2009/3/13 Bill Moran wmo...@potentialtech.com:
Between google searches and my own experiments, I can't find any way to
actually make this
On: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 18:39:27 -0400, A.M.
age...@themactionfaction.com wrote:
The one problem I foresee is that changes to the commodity_tax_rates
table may not reflect in transaction dates that have passed. What
happens if a tax is retroactively ended or applied outside these
barriers? Is
Jack W schrieb:
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 3:45 PM, John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com
mailto:pie...@hogranch.com wrote:
Jack W wrote:
I also find that if I only grant privileges on database to
dbuser as below, without granting privileges on Schema and table
to
Hi,
Can we use sql transaction(BEGIN, COMMIT, REVOKE) inside a user defined
function in Postgresql 8.3?
looking forward to hear from you
Thanks
-Jasid-
--
With warm regards
Jasid Z. A
+91 9946109809
Hi,
I have a serious issue with delete from.
When I do something like:
delete from CALC_INVOICE_DATA where PERIOD_END='2011-01-01'
the postmaster takes 100% CPU and then nothing happens.
Doing any type of select on the same table works just fine, I have tried
various forms of vacuums and
In response to Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com:
Hello
try
postgres=# SELECT ARRAY['text for you some'];
array
---
{text \for you\ some}
(1 row)
Thanks, and I'm aware of that, but it doesn't answer the original
question. The code I'm writing is
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Jasid ZA za.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Can we use sql transaction(BEGIN, COMMIT, REVOKE) inside a user defined
function in Postgresql 8.3?
looking forward to hear from you
Nope.
If function does something naughty - do RAISE EXCEPTION, that will
break
Jasid ZA wrote:
Hi,
Can we use sql transaction(BEGIN, COMMIT, REVOKE) inside a user defined
function in Postgresql 8.3?
Would that part of the documentation help?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/plpgsql-structure.html
Functions and trigger procedures are always executed
Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Jasid ZA za.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Can we use sql transaction(BEGIN, COMMIT, REVOKE) inside a user defined
function in Postgresql 8.3?
looking forward to hear from you
Nope.
If function does something naughty - do RAISE
Bill Moran wrote:
bill=# insert into testarray (a) values (E'{text \\for
you\\,moretext}');
INSERT 0 1
bill=# select * from testarray;
a | id
---+
{text \for you\,moretext} | 3
Actually this one is good. It gets the
On Friday 13 March 2009, e...@devdep.com wrote:
Hi,
I have a serious issue with delete from.
When I do something like:
delete from CALC_INVOICE_DATA where PERIOD_END='2011-01-01'
the postmaster takes 100% CPU and then nothing happens.
Some possibilities:
1) If it's using 100% CPU for a
Marco Colombo pg...@esiway.net writes:
And I'm still wondering. The problem with LVM, AFAIK, is missing support
for write barriers. Once you disable the write-back cache on the disk,
you no longer need write barriers. So I'm missing something, what else
does LVM do to break fsync()?
I think
Greetings to All!
I've tried to find solution of my problem on other pg mailing lists but without
bigger effect.
I have a table A in PG. There is also table A in Oracle.
I want to import specific row from oracle to pg, so i create plperlu function
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION import.ora_a_row(a_id
Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com writes:
It looks like an index using text_pattern_ops can be used for equality
(see my test case below).
This is true as of 8.4; prior versions make a distinction between =
and ~=~.
This works apparently because texteq() is defined as bitwise-equality.
Is that
Tom Lane wrote:
Marco Colombo pg...@esiway.net writes:
And I'm still wondering. The problem with LVM, AFAIK, is missing support
for write barriers. Once you disable the write-back cache on the disk,
you no longer need write barriers. So I'm missing something, what else
does LVM do to break
On Fri, 2009-03-13 at 13:13 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
There is actually some history here; the former distinction in the
equality operators arose from exactly your concern. But after we
put in the second-pass check to insist on bitwise equality, we
realized that the equality operators really
Marco Colombo pg...@esiway.net writes:
You mean some layer (LVM) is lying about the fsync()?
Got it in one.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com writes:
One thing that still doesn't make sense to me is that texteq() is
bitwise-equality even in 8.3.
Historical artifact ... we made the semantics change some time ago, but
the ensuing change to remove ~=~ didn't happen until 8.4.
It sounds like Reece Hart can
On Fri, 2009-03-13 at 14:00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Marco Colombo pg...@esiway.net writes:
You mean some layer (LVM) is lying about the fsync()?
Got it in one.
I wouldn't think this would be a problem with the proper battery backed
raid controller correct?
Joshua D. Drake
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Fri, 2009-03-13 at 14:00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Marco Colombo pg...@esiway.net writes:
You mean some layer (LVM) is lying about the fsync()?
Got it in one.
I wouldn't think this would be a problem with the proper battery backed
raid
On Fri, 2009-03-13 at 11:17 -0700, Ben Chobot wrote:
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Fri, 2009-03-13 at 14:00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Marco Colombo pg...@esiway.net writes:
You mean some layer (LVM) is lying about the fsync()?
Got it in one.
I wouldn't think this
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
It seems to me that all you get with a BBU-enabled card is the ability to
get burts of writes out of the OS faster. So you still have the problem,
it's just less like to be encountered.
A BBU controller is about more than that. It is also supposed
On Fri, 2009-03-13 at 11:41 -0700, Ben Chobot wrote:
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Of course. But if you can't reliably flush the OS buffers (because, say,
you're using LVM so fsync() doesn't work), then you can't say what
actually has made it to the safety of the raid card.
On Fri, 2009-03-13 at 11:41 -0700, Ben Chobot wrote:
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
It seems to me that all you get with a BBU-enabled card is the ability to
get burts of writes out of the OS faster. So you still have the problem,
it's just less like to be encountered.
A
On Mar 13, 2009, at 11:59 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Wait, actually a good BBU RAID controller will disable the cache on
the
drives. So everything that is cached is already on the controller vs.
the drives itself.
Or am I missing something?
Maybe I'm missing something, but a BBU controller
In response to Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com:
Bill Moran wrote:
bill=# insert into testarray (a) values (E'{text \\for
you\\,moretext}');
INSERT 0 1
bill=# select * from testarray;
a | id
---+
{text \for
Going through the PLPython threads on the Planet, I realized that I needed
plpython. So I rebuilt PG with python, expecting that I could then re-catalog
the databases. But, not. initdb, wants the data directory, which is where the
database files are, and doesn't run if it's not empty. The
On Fri, 2009-03-13 at 15:28 -0400, gnuo...@rcn.com wrote:
Going through the PLPython threads on the Planet, I realied that I needed
plpython. So I rebuilt PG with python, expecting that I could then
re-catalog the databases. But, not. initdb, wants the data directory, which
is where the
Bill Moran wmo...@potentialtech.com writes:
In response to Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com:
Actually this one is good. It gets the backslashes in the output because
the
need to be escaped there too ('cause it's an array). But if you output a
single element, they are not there:
Simon Riggs wrote:
The idea of auto rebuilding indexes following recovery has already been
proposed, so is under consideration. It hasn't been proposed in relation
to the use case you mention, so that is new.
If we did as you suggest then it would speed up the base backup but
would also add
Jeremy Harris wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
The idea of auto rebuilding indexes following recovery has already been
proposed, so is under consideration. It hasn't been proposed in relation
to the use case you mention, so that is new.
If we did as you suggest then it would speed up the base backup
- Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com wrote:
On Fri, 2009-03-13 at 15:28 -0400, gnuo...@rcn.com wrote:
Going through the PLPython threads on the Planet, I realied that I
needed plpython. So I rebuilt PG with python, expecting that I could
then re-catalog the databases. But, not.
Adrian Klaver akla...@comcast.net writes:
My guess is he thought he needed to re-initdb the cluster after
rebuilding the source to generate plpythonu. Robert, you don't need to
do that.
At least, not as long as it's the same major PG version and you didn't
change any configure options that
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Christophe x...@thebuild.com wrote:
On Mar 13, 2009, at 11:59 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Wait, actually a good BBU RAID controller will disable the cache on the
drives. So everything that is cached is already on the controller vs.
the drives itself.
Or am I
Have you turned off autovacuum on the first db node before starting
online recovery?
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
Hello,
today I recognized an error while playing with pgpool-II 2.1 and
postgresql 8.3.5 (on 64bit linux).
I really don't know if the error is caused by pgpool or if it's
Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Christophe x...@thebuild.com wrote:
So, if the software calls fsync, but fsync doesn't actually push the data to
the controller, you are still at risk... right?
Ding!
I've been doing some googling, now I'm not sure that not supporting
39 matches
Mail list logo
