Re: [GENERAL] Possible bug in psql 9.4.4

2016-02-26 Thread Adrian Klaver
On 02/26/2016 11:51 AM, David G. Johnston wrote: On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Leonardo M. Ramé mailto:l.r...@griensu.com>>wrote: El 26/02/16 a las 15:59, Leonardo M. Ramé escribió: It looks like psql 9.4.4 has a bug when trying to display table info using \d tablename

Re: [GENERAL] Update foreign table with trigger

2016-02-26 Thread Leonardo M . Ramé
El 26/02/16 a las 17:11, s d escribió: On 26 February 2016 at 21:02, Leonardo M. Ramé mailto:l.r...@griensu.com>> wrote: El 26/02/16 a las 16:49, s d escribió: On 26 February 2016 at 20:42, Leonardo M. Ramé mailto:l.r...@griensu.com>

Re: [GENERAL] Update foreign table with trigger

2016-02-26 Thread s d
On 26 February 2016 at 21:02, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote: > > > El 26/02/16 a las 16:49, s d escribió: > >> On 26 February 2016 at 20:42, Leonardo M. Ramé > > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> Then try to do the update on the remote db directly. >> >> In the meantime co

Re: [GENERAL] Update foreign table with trigger

2016-02-26 Thread Leonardo M . Ramé
El 26/02/16 a las 16:49, s d escribió: On 26 February 2016 at 20:42, Leonardo M. Ramé mailto:l.r...@griensu.com>> wrote: Then try to do the update on the remote db directly. In the meantime could you provide the table and trigger definitions? I don't understand why th

Re: [GENERAL] Possible bug in psql 9.4.4

2016-02-26 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote: > > > El 26/02/16 a las 15:59, Leonardo M. Ramé escribió: > >> It looks like psql 9.4.4 has a bug when trying to display table info >> using \d tablename. >> >> On 9.4.2 that command displays Indexes, Constraints, Triggers, etc. >> 9.4.4 o

Re: [GENERAL] Update foreign table with trigger

2016-02-26 Thread s d
On 26 February 2016 at 20:42, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote: > > > El 26/02/16 a las 16:33, s d escribió: > >> On 26 February 2016 at 20:19, Leonardo M. Ramé > > wrote: >> >> >> >> El 26/02/16 a las 16:18, s d escribió: >> >> >> On 26 February 2016 at 20:02, Leonar

Re: [GENERAL] Update foreign table with trigger

2016-02-26 Thread Leonardo M . Ramé
El 26/02/16 a las 16:33, s d escribió: On 26 February 2016 at 20:19, Leonardo M. Ramé mailto:l.r...@griensu.com>> wrote: El 26/02/16 a las 16:18, s d escribió: On 26 February 2016 at 20:02, Leonardo M. Ramé mailto:l.r...@griensu.com>

Re: [GENERAL] Update foreign table with trigger

2016-02-26 Thread s d
On 26 February 2016 at 20:19, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote: > > > El 26/02/16 a las 16:18, s d escribió: > >> >> On 26 February 2016 at 20:02, Leonardo M. Ramé > > wrote: >> >> >> El 26/02/16 a las 15:55, John R Pierce escribió: >> >> On 2/26/2016 10:29 AM, Leonar

Re: [GENERAL] Update foreign table with trigger

2016-02-26 Thread Leonardo M . Ramé
El 26/02/16 a las 16:18, s d escribió: On 26 February 2016 at 20:02, Leonardo M. Ramé mailto:l.r...@griensu.com>> wrote: El 26/02/16 a las 15:55, John R Pierce escribió: On 2/26/2016 10:29 AM, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote: Hi, I created a Postgres_FDW table (TABLE_A) and

Re: [GENERAL] Update foreign table with trigger

2016-02-26 Thread s d
On 26 February 2016 at 20:02, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote: > > El 26/02/16 a las 15:55, John R Pierce escribió: > >> On 2/26/2016 10:29 AM, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote: >> >>> Hi, I created a Postgres_FDW table (TABLE_A) and need to do an update on >>> that table. >>> >>> As TABLE_A has a trigger, and the

Re: [GENERAL] Possible bug in psql 9.4.4

2016-02-26 Thread Leonardo M . Ramé
El 26/02/16 a las 15:59, Leonardo M. Ramé escribió: It looks like psql 9.4.4 has a bug when trying to display table info using \d tablename. On 9.4.2 that command displays Indexes, Constraints, Triggers, etc. 9.4.4 only displays the table fields. Regards, Sorry, option \t (Tuples Only) must

Re: [GENERAL] Update foreign table with trigger

2016-02-26 Thread Leonardo M . Ramé
El 26/02/16 a las 15:55, John R Pierce escribió: On 2/26/2016 10:29 AM, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote: Hi, I created a Postgres_FDW table (TABLE_A) and need to do an update on that table. As TABLE_A has a trigger, and the trigger does an insert on another table (TABLE_B), I had to create another fo

[GENERAL] Possible bug in psql 9.4.4

2016-02-26 Thread Leonardo M . Ramé
It looks like psql 9.4.4 has a bug when trying to display table info using \d tablename. On 9.4.2 that command displays Indexes, Constraints, Triggers, etc. 9.4.4 only displays the table fields. Regards, -- Leonardo M. Ramé Medical IT - Griensu S.A. Av. Colón 636 - Piso 8 Of. A X5000EPT -- Có

Re: [GENERAL] Update foreign table with trigger

2016-02-26 Thread John R Pierce
On 2/26/2016 10:29 AM, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote: Hi, I created a Postgres_FDW table (TABLE_A) and need to do an update on that table. As TABLE_A has a trigger, and the trigger does an insert on another table (TABLE_B), I had to create another foreign table called TABLE_B, that's ok. that tr

Re: [GENERAL] Privileges granted on dblink extension function do not survive database dump and restore

2016-02-26 Thread Jerry Sievers
Bryan Ellerbrock writes: > Huh. Thanks for the quick reply Joe. I'm still not sure I fully understand > the behavior here, but it's nice to at least be able to discuss it. > > The documentation you shared makes it clear that, unless extra steps > are taken, changes to an extension's object defin

[GENERAL] Update foreign table with trigger

2016-02-26 Thread Leonardo M . Ramé
Hi, I created a Postgres_FDW table (TABLE_A) and need to do an update on that table. As TABLE_A has a trigger, and the trigger does an insert on another table (TABLE_B), I had to create another foreign table called TABLE_B, that's ok. At this point I have two foreign tables, TABLE_A and TABL

Re: [GENERAL] Privileges granted on dblink extension function do not survive database dump and restore

2016-02-26 Thread Joe Conway
On 02/26/2016 07:12 AM, David G. Johnston wrote: > pg_dump emits a "CREATE EXTENSION" statement to the dump file and then > pg_restore executes the "CREATE EXTENSION". None of the actual schema > objects are dumped and thus any changes to those objects in the current > database, including their pe

Re: [GENERAL] Privileges granted on dblink extension function do not survive database dump and restore

2016-02-26 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 8:00 AM, Bryan Ellerbrock wrote: > Huh. Thanks for the quick reply Joe. I'm still not sure I fully understand > the behavior here, but it's nice to at least be able to discuss it. > > The documentation you shared makes it clear that, unless extra steps are > taken, changes

Re: [GENERAL] Privileges granted on dblink extension function do not survive database dump and restore

2016-02-26 Thread Bryan Ellerbrock
Huh. Thanks for the quick reply Joe. I'm still not sure I fully understand the behavior here, but it's nice to at least be able to discuss it. The documentation you shared makes it clear that, unless extra steps are taken, changes to an extension's object definitions won't be preserved in a dump.

Re: [GENERAL] pg_restore real file size

2016-02-26 Thread Alban Hertroys
> On 26 Feb 2016, at 5:30, John R Pierce wrote: > > On 2/25/2016 8:26 PM, drum.lu...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> I'm doing the pg_restore now in a 1.5TB file: >> >> # ls -la >> postgres postgres 1575324616939 Feb 20 13:55 devdb_0.sql >> >> But, the restore has gone over 1.6 TB >> > > the dump fi

Re: [GENERAL] pg_restore real file size

2016-02-26 Thread Shulgin, Oleksandr
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 5:30 AM, John R Pierce wrote: > On 2/25/2016 8:26 PM, drum.lu...@gmail.com wrote: > > > I'm doing the pg_restore now in a 1.5TB file: > > *# ls -la* > > postgres postgres 1575324616939 Feb 20 13:55 devdb_0.sql > > But, the restore has gone over 1.6 TB > > > the dump file d