On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 19:10, Alban Hertroys
wrote:
> On 14 Jun 2010, at 2:02, Clemens Schwaighofer wrote:
>
>> Right now I added two simple wrappers in my .psqlrc
>>
>> \set shsh 'SHOW search_path;'
>> \set setsh 'SET search_path TO'
>>
>> So I can at least set and check the schema more quickly.
Hi,
I am trying to figure out how I can show the current search_path, or
better the first search_path entry (the active schema) in the PROMPT
variable for psql.
Is there any way to do that? I couldn't find anything useful ...
--
★ Clemens 呉 Schwaighofer
★ IT Engineer/Web Producer/Planning
★ E-G
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 11:30, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote:
> Nope; you're wrong. Even RPM doesn't remove the data. But its always
> safer to keep a backup.
I am not talking about removing the data I am talking of not beeing
able to access it because the database itself is still in the old
version.
I tried that too, in all of my trigger functions, it still didn't
change anything.
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 09:42, Tom Lane wrote:
> Clemens Schwaighofer writes:
>> I already tried that. even with prefixing the alter table statement
>> with the schema it does not work.
>
> Not the ALTER TABLE, the
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 21:21, Ivan Sergio Borgonovo
wrote:
> I need to create a new schema with all the content in an existing
> one, just with a new name.
>
> The way I've found is:
> - make a backup
> - load it in a dev box
> - rename the schema
> - make a backup of the new schema
> - restore t
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 19:01, Marc Cuypers wrote:
> Thanks Tom,
>
> Only...
>
> One database was in LATIN9. When creating this database i got the same
> error.
>
> Command:
> CREATE DATABASE "hardsoft" WITH OWNER = postgres TEMPLATE = template0
> ENCODING = 'LATIN9';
>
> Error:
> ERROR: encodin
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 17:42, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 9:20 PM, Clemens Schwaighofer
> wrote:
>
>> But yesterday I run in some issues with table ownership and thought if I
>> just give the user all rights for the DB, he should have all rights to
>> the tables too.
>
> Try g
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 16:09, John R Pierce wrote:
> Clemens Schwaighofer wrote:
>>
>> The other problem is, that there is no "grant all on table db.* ..." but
>> I have to do that for each table seperate, or in a "grant all on table
>> a, b, ...".
>>
>> I am not sure if there is an easier way, e
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 07:31, Ivan Sergio Borgonovo
wrote:
> alter table y set schema new_schema;
>
> test=# SELECT * from x();
> ERROR: relation "y" does not exist
> CONTEXT: SQL statement " select a,b from x join y on x.xid=y.xid"
> PL/pgSQL function "x" line 2 at RETURN QUERY
> test=# SELECT
ileges
+--+---+---
public | test | table | {foo=arwdxt/foo,bar=arwdxt/foo}
and then login again with user 'bar'
=> select * from test;
test
--
foo
(1 row)
I am seriously confused and ask myself what I do wrong
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 21:06, Albe Laure
Version:
PostgreSQL 8.3.5 on i486-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC gcc-4.3.real
(Debian 4.3.2-1) 4.3.2
I have a DB "foo" created and owned by postgres.
No I created another role called "bar" and with the user postgres in
the db foo I did:
#> grant all on foo to bar;
when I select from pg_database
I have two tables
Table "public.mailings"
Column | Type| Modifiers
+---+---
key| character varying |
name | character varying |
Table "public.userdata"
Column | Type| Modifiers
+---+
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 15:35, Kusuma Pabba wrote:
>
> may this be a silly doubts but , i am new to postgres, please answer to
> these::
>
> /usr/local/pgsql/bin/psql test
> test=#
>
>
> sudo su postgres -c psql template1
> template=#
>
>
> what is the difference between the above two and,
> why is
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 18:34, Andy Greensted wrote:
> So, two questions:
>
> - Is there anyway to run a newer version (8.3.5) of psql in some sort of
> 'backwards compatible' mode?
>
> - Do you have any tips on making 7.1.3 compile on a newer system?
The last time I had to compile super old cod
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 02:18, David Goodenough
wrote:
>
> Is there a definative HOWTO that I can follow, if not does someone
> have a set of instructions that will work?
>
> If it matters I am running under Debian.
I did it once for a very large db (large for me was 5GB) and converted
it from EU
But if I have my work mem small, shouldn't it then just end with "out
of memory" and not use up all the memory ...
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 18:48, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:
> try raising work_mem before the delete; on single connection :
>
> set work_mem=512000; DELETE FROM ..;
>
--
[ Cle
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 20:27, Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am Thursday, 14. August 2008 schrieb Clemens Schwaighofer:
> > Why is Postgres not using the indexes in the 8.3 installation.
>
> Might have something to do with the removal of some implicit casts. You
> should show us y
17 matches
Mail list logo
