We're using postgresql 9.1, and we've got a table that looks like this:
testdb=# \d item
Table public.item
Column | Type | Modifiers
---+--+---
sig | bigint | not null
type | smallint |
data | text |
Indexes:
item_pkey PRIMARY KEY, btree (sig)
And
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 6:22 AM, Chris Dumoulin ch...@blaze.io wrote:
We're using postgresql 9.1, and we've got a table that looks like this:
testdb=# \d item
Table public.item
Column | Type | Modifiers
---+--+---
sig | bigint | not null
type | smallint |
On 11-11-02 08:49 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 6:22 AM, Chris Dumoulinch...@blaze.io wrote:
We're using postgresql 9.1, and we've got a table that looks like this:
testdb=# \d item
Table public.item
Column | Type | Modifiers
---+--+---
sig |
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 07:22:09AM -0400, Chris Dumoulin wrote:
And we're doing an insert like this:
INSERT INTO Item (Sig, Type, Data) SELECT $1,$2,$3 WHERE NOT EXISTS
( SELECT NULL FROM Item WHERE Sig=$4)
In this case $1 and $4 should always be the same.
FWIW, If they're always going to
On 11-11-02 09:13 AM, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 07:22:09AM -0400, Chris Dumoulin wrote:
And we're doing an insert like this:
INSERT INTO Item (Sig, Type, Data) SELECT $1,$2,$3 WHERE NOT EXISTS
( SELECT NULL FROM Item WHERE Sig=$4)
In this case $1 and $4 should
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Chris Dumoulin ch...@blaze.io wrote:
On 11-11-02 09:13 AM, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 07:22:09AM -0400, Chris Dumoulin wrote:
And we're doing an insert like this:
INSERT INTO Item (Sig, Type, Data) SELECT $1,$2,$3 WHERE NOT EXISTS
(
On Tuesday 01 November 2011 12:00:33 Craig Ringer wrote:
A workaround for reindexing while live is to begin a transaction, create
the new index with a new name, drop the old one, rename the new one to
the old one, and commit. This only requires an exclusive lock for the
period of the drop and
Vincent de Phily vincent.deph...@mobile-devices.fr writes:
The technique kinda works (with some changes) using unique indexes however.
Is
there a functional difference between a unique index and a primary key index
(knowing that my column is not null) ? Or is it just for documentation and
Hi all,
The postgres manual explains the replication_timeout to be used to
Terminate replication connections that are inactive longer than the
specified number of milliseconds. This is useful for the primary server to
detect a standby crash or network outage
Is there a similar configuration
Thanks a lot Ondrej Ivanic.I have few more doubts.
1)While installing the postgress it asks for the data directory,which i
refer to SAN volume(Shared LUN)-(example - /dbdata/pgsqldata).
After that i am exporting $PGDATA= SAN Volume(example - /dbdata/pgsqldata).
Where /dbdata is the shared LUN .
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Alan Hodgson ahodg...@simkin.ca wrote:
On October 31, 2011 03:01:19 PM Stephen Denne wrote:
I'm wondering whether it's worth doing anyway, simply to check that it
doesn't do something completely unexpected, which would presumably alert
us to something we hadn't
Howdy,
just a quick check, is
vm.overcommit_memory = 2
vm.swappiness = 0
Still the way to go with PG9.0 / RHEL 6.1 (64bit) ?
I know we gained some control over the OOM Killer in newer kernels
and remember reading that maybe postgres could handle it in a different way now.
Thanks
Dave
--
Well,
After reading several glowing reviews of the new OCZ Vertex3 SSD last spring,
we did some performance testing in dev on RHEL6. (CentOS)
The results were nothing short of staggering. Complex query results returned
in 1/10th the time as a pessimistic measurement. System loads dropped
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Benjamin Smith
li...@benjamindsmith.com wrote:
Well,
After reading several glowing reviews of the new OCZ Vertex3 SSD last spring,
we did some performance testing in dev on RHEL6. (CentOS)
The results were nothing short of staggering. Complex query results
2011/10/30 Devrim GÜNDÜZ dev...@gunduz.org:
[Moving to pgsql-general]
On Sun, 2011-10-30 at 07:24 +0100, hubert depesz lubaczewski wrote:
we'd like to upgrade to newest 8.3, and we're on 8.3.11 _id, but it
looks like 8.3.11 is the newest version of 8.3 built with integer
datetimes:
On November 2, 2011 08:55:39 AM Debasis Mishra wrote:
My doubt is - Whether cluster should start the postgres service in
secondary node during failover or postgress will be running always. My
undersatnding was in both the node postgress will be running and pointing
to shared dbdata. And if
On 11/2/2011 11:01 AM, Benjamin Smith wrote:
2) Intel X25E - good reputation, significantly slower than the Vertex3. We're
buying some to reduce downtime.
If you don't mind spending money, look at the new 710 Series from Intel.
Not SLC like the X25E, but still specified with a very high
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Debasis Mishra debasis1...@gmail.comwrote:
Thanks a lot Ondrej Ivanic.I have few more doubts.
1)While installing the postgress it asks for the data directory,which i
refer to SAN volume(Shared LUN)-(example - /dbdata/pgsqldata).
After that i am exporting
you really need to watch out for excess write caching on SSDs. only a
few are safe against power failures while under heavy database write
activity.
--
john r pierceN 37, W 122
santa cruz ca mid-left coast
--
Sent via pgsql-general
I have two servers, one a x86 32bit server, and the other one is a x86
64 bit server.
We want to use synchronous replication and make the 32 bit be a master
and the 64bit be a read-only stand-by.
Do I have to install 32bit postgresql on the 64bit server to be able
to use wal replication?
--
2011/11/2 Martín Marqués martin.marq...@gmail.com
I have two servers, one a x86 32bit server, and the other one is a x86
64 bit server.
We want to use synchronous replication and make the 32 bit be a master
and the 64bit be a read-only stand-by.
Do I have to install 32bit postgresql on the
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:42, David Kerr d...@mr-paradox.net wrote:
Howdy,
just a quick check, is
vm.overcommit_memory = 2
vm.swappiness = 0
Still the way to go with PG9.0 / RHEL 6.1 (64bit) ?
IMHO yes (although I never touch swappiness...)
I know we gained some control over the OOM
Hello,
I stripped down the original query to what is below. I am not saying
that the query below
is useful except to show an error I am getting in Postgresql 9.1.1 on
both SL6.1 (64 bit) and
Windows 2008 server 9.1.1 (32-bit and 64-bit). The error I am getting is:
ERROR: variable not
Since upgrading test systems to postgresql 9.1, I am seeing some inserts
to bytea fields giving errors such as ERROR: invalid byte sequence for
encoding UTF8: 0xf9 Where the insert is from a C program using libpq
and is of the form insert into xxx values(E'%s') where the value is
the return of
We're using postgresql 9.1, and we've got a table that looks like this:
testdb=# \d item
Table public.item
Column | Type | Modifiers
---+--+---
sig | bigint | not null
type | smallint |
data | text |
Indexes:
item_pkey PRIMARY KEY, btree (sig)
And
sean, could you share your solution in a little more detail. im having the
exact problem now...
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/installation-problems-on-OSX-Lion-tp4627419p4957366.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at
Don't worry, they are both x86 arch, so I'll just install 32bit
postgresql on the 64 bit server. That should make it work, right?
El día 2 de noviembre de 2011 14:55, Adam Cornett
adam.corn...@gmail.com escribió:
2011/11/2 Martín Marqués martin.marq...@gmail.com
I have two servers, one a x86
Graham Murray gmur...@webwayone.co.uk writes:
Since upgrading test systems to postgresql 9.1, I am seeing some inserts
to bytea fields giving errors such as ERROR: invalid byte sequence for
encoding UTF8: 0xf9 Where the insert is from a C program using libpq
and is of the form insert into xxx
On 11/02/11 11:21 AM, Martín Marqués wrote:
Don't worry, they are both x86 arch, so I'll just install 32bit
postgresql on the 64 bit server. That should make it work, right?
yes, that should work fine.
--
john r pierceN 37, W 122
santa cruz ca
Vertex 3 and ocz in general has a very bad reputation in the enthusiast
scene. Sudden
issues, hard locks, data loss and so on. Just go and look in the OCZ
forums. I would not dare by on Vertex 3 for my desktop...have 2 Intel ones.
I have no idea what you do but just the fact that you bought
Hello All
For replication ,Created cluster and after I run Slon command
getting error on
PQconnectdb(dbname=XYZ host= user=cls password=1) failed - could not
translate host name
Could you please help ?
Thx
Prashant
Why do you have host= without a hostname? Where is your closing ?
Brandon Phelps
Global Linking Solutions
O: (704) 973-6855
C: (704) 222-2103
E: bphe...@gls.com
On 11/02/2011 02:34 PM, Prashant Bharucha wrote:
Hello All
For replication ,Created cluster and after I run Slon command
getting
On 02/11/2011 18:34, Prashant Bharucha wrote:
Hello All
For replication ,Created cluster and after I run Slon command
getting error on
PQconnectdb(dbname=XYZ host= user=cls password=1) failed - could
not translate host name
The host is missing from the above.
Ray.
--
Raymond
On 11/02/11 11:39 AM, Thomas Strunz wrote:
For database I assume random read and writes are by way the most
important thing and any recent ssd is orders of magnitude faster in
that are compared to HDD even the slow Intel drives.
actually, SSD's have issues with committed small block (8K)
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Raymond O'Donnell r...@iol.ie wrote:
On 02/11/2011 18:34, Prashant Bharucha wrote:
Hello All
For replication ,Created cluster and after I run Slon command
getting error on
PQconnectdb(dbname=XYZ host= user=cls password=1) failed - could
not
We're not doing this long-term, in order to have a backup server we can
fail-over to, but rather as a one-off low impact move of our database.
Consequently, instead of using pg_start_backup and pg_stop_backup, and
keeping all WAL, we're stopping the database, rsync of everything, and
But Host Address should take automatically,
same thing is working good on other machine.
--- On Wed, 11/2/11, Raymond O'Donnell r...@iol.ie wrote:
From: Raymond O'Donnell r...@iol.ie
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Error On Slony Replication
To: Prashant Bharucha prashantbharu...@yahoo.ca
Cc:
On 2011-11-02 18:01, Benjamin Smith wrote:
So after months of using this SSD without any issues at all, we tentatively
rolled this out to production, and had blissful, sweet beauty until about 2
weeks ago, now we are running into sudden death scenarios.
Could you tell a bit more about the
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:42 AM, David Kerr d...@mr-paradox.net wrote:
Howdy,
just a quick check, is
vm.overcommit_memory = 2
vm.swappiness = 0
Still the way to go with PG9.0 / RHEL 6.1 (64bit) ?
If you've got lots of ram, it's better off to throw a swapoff -a at
the end of rc.local, as I
2011/11/2 John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com:
On 11/02/11 11:21 AM, Martín Marqués wrote:
Don't worry, they are both x86 arch, so I'll just install 32bit
postgresql on the 64 bit server. That should make it work, right?
yes, that should work fine.
Sad thing is that it's not so easy on
Roger Niederland ro...@niederland.com writes:
I stripped enough out of the database that it is only good for a test
case. Here is a public url for getting at the database backup:
I've committed a fix for this:
41 matches
Mail list logo
