On 07/06/2012 11:13 AM, ssylla wrote:
Dear list,
I have an existing PostgreSQL DB and I would like to draw a model of the DB
structure. Is there some software (Freeware) around that can read the
existing structure of my DB and automatically draw e.g. an ER-model of that?
I use and like SchemaSp
Dear list,
I have an existing PostgreSQL DB and I would like to draw a model of the DB
structure. Is there some software (Freeware) around that can read the
existing structure of my DB and automatically draw e.g. an ER-model of that?
The software that I have found so far (e.g. Open System Architec
Dear list,
I have an existing PostgreSQL DB and I would like to draw a model of the DB
structure. Is there some software (Freeware) around that can read the
existing structure of my DB and automatically draw e.g. an ER-model of that?
The software that I have found so far (e.g. Open System Archit
On 07/06/2012 09:33 AM, Samuel Gendler wrote:
Some other potential issues - with only 10MB of work_mem, you might be
gong to temp space on disk more than you realize. Explain analyze
might reveal that, but only if you happen to pick a query that exceeds
work_mem on at least one step.
Rather
I note you've decided to rewrite this query as a union
> SELECT * FROM account
> WHERE user_id in
> (SELECT user_id FROM account
> WHERE id =
> ANY('{-02f6-379d-c000-00026810,-0320-b467-c000-00026810,-000d-cefb-c000-00026810}'))
> OR
> id =
For reasons I've brought up before
(http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2012-06/msg00174.php), I
need to stop some of my extension tables from dumping data when a
schema only dump is done because they have the potential to contain A
LOT of data.
For reference my extension is https://githu
On Jul 5, 2012, at 3:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Steven Schlansker writes:
>> Why is using an OR so awful here?
>
> Because the OR stops it from being a join (it possibly needs to return
> some rows that are not in the semijoin of the two tables).
>
>> Why does it pick a sequential scan? Is this
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> I think Packt were experimenting with a kind of "pocket book" format,
> so I'm sure they'd welcome your feedback on how well that works. I'm
> not sure there was any intention for people to buy both.
>
>
Thanks to both of you for your comments
On 5 July 2012 22:09, James Hartley wrote:
> Although the titles are *very* similar, these don't appear to be the same,
> however, they do resemble the information found in the lengthier 2010 tome
> (which I already have...):
The LITE books are subsets of the main book. They're not identical but
Steven Schlansker writes:
> Why is using an OR so awful here?
Because the OR stops it from being a join (it possibly needs to return
some rows that are not in the semijoin of the two tables).
> Why does it pick a sequential scan? Is this an optimizer bug
No. It can't transform OR into a UNION
beamsplit...@gmail.com writes:
> I'm having trouble with WAL files. Every 4th WAL file written by the server
> into pg_xlog is 24576 bytes instead of 16MB. A short WAL causes a fatal
> error during recovery.
Hm. It's fairly hard to see how you could get into such a state to
start with, but once t
Hi all,
I have a query which is being optimized very differently depending on whether
it is written using an OR clause or a UNION clause.
I believe that the query results should be the same, and even if I've missed
something with regards to something small (e.g. NULL handling) I do not believe
On Jul 5, 2012, at 2:09 PM, James Hartley wrote:
>
>
> By scouring the table of contents, it appears that these "newer" LITE
> editions are subsets of the older volume. It does not appear that there is
> any new material in these newer offerings.
>
> I am *very* much a fan of Simon Riggs' 201
Hi,
I'm having trouble with WAL files. Every 4th WAL file written by the server
into pg_xlog is 24576 bytes instead of 16MB. A short WAL causes a fatal
error during recovery.
This behavior is perfectly consistent. For example, if archive_timeout is 5
mins, every 20 minutes the new WAL file is 245
In poking about Amazon's PostgreSQL titles recently, I found two that I had
not seen before:
PostgreSQL 9 Administration Cookbook LITE: Configuration, Monitoring, &
Maintenance:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1849516421/ref=ox_sc_act_title_7?ie=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER
PostgreSQL Administration C
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 2:38 AM, Andy Chambers wrote:
> Is it possible to "cancel" a pg_ctl stop if some clients remain
> connected and there is no longer a need to stop the DB?
Nope. Once started it can't be cancelled.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-
Is it possible to "cancel" a pg_ctl stop if some clients remain
connected and there is no longer a need to stop the DB?
--
Andy Chambers
Software Engineer
(e) achamb...@mcna.net
(t) 954-682-0573
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail may contain information
that is privileged, confidential
> Per Toms suggestion you need to check the permissions on the schema.
> One way to do that is, from psql type the following and enter:
> \dn+
One other thing you might want to verify: Does user XXX have the
PUBLIC schema in their search_path? It is by default, but some people
take it out for sec
On 07/05/2012 07:46 AM, Stefan Schwarzer wrote:
Now, when I launch a query which includes "crosstab()" as a postgres user,
everything works fine. However, if I launch it as user XXX, it complaints:
The search path is indicated as:
"$user", public, metadata, admin, gis, tablefunc, post
Stefan Schwarzer writes:
> Ahh
. Indeed, no "tablefunc" schema in there.
If the textual value of search_path (as per "show search_path") lists
the schema but current_schemas() doesn't, I have to think that you've
got a permissions problem --- the system will silently ignore any
search_path entrie
> Now, when I launch a query which includes "crosstab()" as a postgres
> user, everything works fine. However, if I launch it as user XXX, it
> complaints:
>>>
Are you schema qualifying the function name when you use it?
If not, does user XXX have schema tablefunc in their
On 07/04/2012 11:20 PM, Stefan Schwarzer wrote:
Now, when I launch a query which includes "crosstab()" as a postgres user,
everything works fine. However, if I launch it as user XXX, it complaints:
Are you schema qualifying the function name when you use it?
If not, does user XXX have schema
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 8:15 AM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have a small question about the site of PostgreSQL source.
>> http://www.postgresql.org/ftp/source/
>>
>> Now I can see some directories of PostgreSQL 9.2beta1/2.
>> - v9.2.0beta1
>> - v9.2.0beta2
>> - v9.2beta1
>> - v9.2beta2
>>
>
23 matches
Mail list logo
