[BUGS] PostgreSQL Service on Windows does not start.

Hi All, I have found a case that PostgreSQL Service does not start. When it happens, the following error appears. "is not a valid Win32 application" This failure occurs when the following conditions are true. 1. There is "postgres.exe" in any directory that contains a space, such as "Progra

Re: R: Re: [BUGS] postgresql 8.4 on android table with debian installed (Debian Kit APK)

On 02/08/13 09:47, Mark Kirkwood wrote: For the archives, looks like that was the issue, users need to be a member of a certain group (gid 303) to use sockets (which is exactly what Alvaro suspected). Make that gid 3003, sorry. -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.or

Re: R: Re: [BUGS] postgresql 8.4 on android table with debian installed (Debian Kit APK)

On 01/08/13 22:13, f...@libero.it wrote: Da: mark.kirkw...@catalyst.net.nz See http://android-dls.com/wiki/index.php?title=Debian_on_G1 near the bottom they discuss this issue. Cheers Mark Thanks very very much: problem solved, postgresql, apache2, php5 ported on a 50$ small android table w

Re: [BUGS] postgresql 8.4 on android table with debian installed (Debian Kit APK)

On 01/08/13 09:13, f...@libero.it wrote: problem: LOG: could not create IPv6 socket: Permission denied LOG: could not create IPv4 socket: Permission denied WARNING: could not create listen socket for "localhost" FATAL: could not create any TCP/IP sockets See http://android-dls.com/

Re: [BUGS] postgresql 8.4 on android table with debian installed (Debian Kit APK)

f...@libero.it wrote: > problem: > I have build from source posgresql (8.4) on a android table whith a minimal > linux debian installed."configure" process and "make" (compiling source) and > "make install": all are OK!! > Also initdb works fine (/usr/local/pgsql/bin/initdb -D /usr/local/pgsql/da

[BUGS] postgresql 8.4 on android table with debian installed (Debian Kit APK)

problem: I have build from source posgresql (8.4) on a android table whith a minimal linux debian installed."configure" process and "make" (compiling source) and "make install": all are OK!! Also initdb works fine (/usr/local/pgsql/bin/initdb -D /usr/local/pgsql/data). but postgresql (launched wi

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL and OpenVZ

Dear Postgres Gurus > > Has there been any luck with this strange Postgres on OpenVZ edge case? > We're also getting the 'could not read block' error. > > Warwick > On Monday, July 22, 2013, Warwick Chapman wrote: > >> Антон >> >> Did you manage to make any progress with OpenVZ and PostgreSQL on

[BUGS] PostgreSQL error

Dear experts, I hope, you can help me: I installed ((PostgreSQL) 8.1.19) on our solaris machine (5.10 Generic_142909-17 sun4v sparc SUNW,SPARC-Enterprise-T5120) for dspace applikation. But I get a error if I execute the commands: pgres@zairicha:bin> ./createdb -U dspace -E UNICODE dspace Th

Re: [BUGS] Postgresql 9.12 support cluster mode

On 5/16/2013 2:14 AM, weiwei wrote: Postgresql 9.12 support cluster mode? Equivalent of main spare automatic switching there's no such thing as PostgreSQL 9.12, there's 9.1 of which the current build is 9.1.9, and there's 9.2 which is currently 9.2.4. You can build a active/standby failover

[BUGS] Postgresql 9.12 support cluster mode

Dear hello： Postgresql 9.12 support cluster mode? Equivalent of main spare automatic switching 电话：010-87120766-5738 手机：13371663316 邮件：wei...@ti-net.com.cn

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL v8.1.11 compatibility with OS 2008 R2

On 12/4/2012 1:38 AM, Duggirala, Manikanth (TCS) wrote: Can you please let us know if PostgreSQL v8.1.11 is compatible with OS 2008 R2 ? 8.1.anything shouldn't be installed today, its an obsolete deprecated version. that said, IIRC, there were major issues with versions prior to 8.3 on

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL v8.1.11 compatibility with OS 2008 R2

This is not a bug report. Please post any future questions to a more appropriate list: http://www.postgresql.org/community/lists/ Duggirala, Manikanth (TCS) wrote: > Can you please let us know if PostgreSQL v8.1.11 is compatible > with OS 2008 R2 ? No, it's not. Problems with PostgreSQL versio

[BUGS] PostgreSQL v8.1.11 compatibility with OS 2008 R2

Hello Team, Can you please let us know if PostgreSQL v8.1.11 is compatible with OS 2008 R2 ? Thanks, Manikanth Duggirala Misc. Apps Support Team TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES Maharashtra,INDIA. Contact : +918983412923 E-mail : manikanth.duggir...@bp.com

[BUGS] postgresql 9.2.1 dumps core on SmartOS(solaris) when the OS is rebooted

I've got postgres 9.2.1 32bit running in production on SmartOS(solaris) with synchronous remote-write replication enabled. At some point, both of the boxes were rebooted. Upon reboot, one of the postgres instances dumps core with the following stack trace: Loading modules: [ libc.so.1 ld.so.1 ]

Re: [BUGS] PostGreSQL pgdac - C++ Builder 2007

On 08/30/2012 12:08 AM, lacm...@sapo.pt wrote: Does someone know what this could be? Also, this is *clearly* not a PostgreSQL bug, just to make that explicit. It's an issue in: - most likely your code or build systems; or - pgdac - C++builder - a compatibility issue between the two - someth

Re: [BUGS] PostGreSQL pgdac - C++ Builder 2007

On 08/30/2012 12:08 AM, lacm...@sapo.pt wrote: Hi, I am working with c++ Builder 2007, and try to work also with PostGreSQL. Is that Borland/Embarcadero C++ builder? If so, I have to ask: *why*? I have downloaded the following exe, http://www.devart.com/pgdac/pgdac11.exe Which is http://w

[BUGS] PostGreSQL pgdac - C++ Builder 2007

Hi, I am working with c++ Builder 2007, and try to work also with PostGreSQL. I have downloaded the following exe, http://www.devart.com/pgdac/pgdac11.exe But i have an error while building, [Linker Error] Unresolved external 'WSAIoctl' referenced from C:\PROGRAM FILES (X86)\CODEGEAR\RAD STUD

Re: [BUGS] postgresql-9.1.4 macosx-10.6.8 (hostssl) psql -h hostname crashes

On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 6:34 AM, raf wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > > raf writes: > > > i've just upgraded to 9.1.4 on macosx-10.6.8 and psql crashes > > > whenever the -h option is used (either with "localhost" or any > > > other hostname). i only have hostssl connections. > > > > > attached is a

Re: [BUGS] postgresql-9.1.4 macosx-10.6.8 (hostssl) psql -h hostname crashes

Tom Lane wrote: > raf writes: > > i've just upgraded to 9.1.4 on macosx-10.6.8 and psql crashes > > whenever the -h option is used (either with "localhost" or any > > other hostname). i only have hostssl connections. > > > attached is a macosx crash report in case it helps. > > [ squint ... ]

Re: [BUGS] postgresql-9.1.4 macosx-10.6.8 (hostssl) psql -h hostname crashes

raf writes: > i've just upgraded to 9.1.4 on macosx-10.6.8 and psql crashes > whenever the -h option is used (either with "localhost" or any > other hostname). i only have hostssl connections. > attached is a macosx crash report in case it helps. [ squint ... ] There's something awfully fishy a

[BUGS] postgresql-9.1.4 macosx-10.6.8 (hostssl) psql -h hostname crashes

hi, i've just upgraded to 9.1.4 on macosx-10.6.8 and psql crashes whenever the -h option is used (either with "localhost" or any other hostname). i only have hostssl connections. attached is a macosx crash report in case it helps. i think i'll downgrade now :-) cheers, raf Process: psq

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1's pg_upgrade fails on Windows XP

On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 05:10:19PM +1200, Edmund Horner wrote: > On 26 May 2012 01:10, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Ah, turns out I only need one extra log file on Windows, not two, > > because I can reuse the utility file for pg_ctl stop.  The original > > beta1 code usesd the utility file for pg_ctl

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1's pg_upgrade fails on Windows XP

On 26 May 2012 01:10, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Ah, turns out I only need one extra log file on Windows, not two, > because I can reuse the utility file for pg_ctl stop.  The original > beta1 code usesd the utility file for pg_ctl stop and start, which is > what caused the problem. > > Applied patch

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1's pg_upgrade fails on Windows XP

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 08:34:01PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 11:48:53AM +1200, Edmund Horner wrote: > > It still fails (when run in verbose mode): > > > > Creating catalog dump > > ""c:\ehorner\pgsql\bin/pg_dumpall" --port 50432 --username "ehorner" > > --schema-onl

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1's pg_upgrade fails on Windows XP

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 11:48:53AM +1200, Edmund Horner wrote: > It still fails (when run in verbose mode): > > Creating catalog dump > ""c:\ehorner\pgsql\bin/pg_dumpall" --port 50432 --username "ehorner" > --schema-only --binary-upgrade --verbose > "pg_upgrade_dump_all.sql" > 2>> "pg_upgrade_

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1's pg_upgrade fails on Windows XP

On 25 May 2012 11:48, Edmund Horner wrote: > It still fails (when run in verbose mode): Sorry, let me correct that to: It still fails, regardless of verbose mode. And, in verbose mode, the output is... -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your sub

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1's pg_upgrade fails on Windows XP

On 25 May 2012 01:59, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 03:42:25PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> I've built a new one off git master + Bruce's patch. You can get it >> from http://www.hagander.net/tmp/pg_upgrade.zip - please see if that >> one works for you. > > Thanks, but thinkin

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1's pg_upgrade fails on Windows XP

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 03:42:25PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 2:40 AM, Edmund Horner wrote: > > On 24 May 2012 12:33, Bruce Momjian wrote: > >> I have applied the attached patch which should fix the problem.   How > >> can we get Edmund a copy of a new binary for test

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1's pg_upgrade fails on Windows XP

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 2:40 AM, Edmund Horner wrote: > On 24 May 2012 12:33, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> I have applied the attached patch which should fix the problem.   How >> can we get Edmund a copy of a new binary for testing?  Does he have to >> wait for beta2? > > My uneducated guess is that

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1's pg_upgrade fails on Windows XP

On 24 May 2012 12:33, Bruce Momjian wrote: > I have applied the attached patch which should fix the problem.   How > can we get Edmund a copy of a new binary for testing?  Does he have to > wait for beta2? My uneducated guess is that your patch will fix the problem. But I don't think I'm up to c

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1's pg_upgrade fails on Windows XP

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 03:20:30PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 5:50 AM, Edmund Horner wrote: > > On 22 May 2012 18:49, Craig Ringer wrote: > >> When you shut down the 9.1.3 cluster did you make absolutely certain there > >> were no postgres.exe processes lurking around

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1's pg_upgrade fails on Windows XP

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 5:50 AM, Edmund Horner wrote: > On 22 May 2012 18:49, Craig Ringer wrote: >> When you shut down the 9.1.3 cluster did you make absolutely certain there >> were no postgres.exe processes lurking around when you tested? Given the >> incredible thouroughness of your report I

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1's pg_upgrade fails on Windows XP

On 22 May 2012 18:49, Craig Ringer wrote: > When you shut down the 9.1.3 cluster did you make absolutely certain there > were no postgres.exe processes lurking around when you tested? Given the > incredible thouroughness of your report I imagine you did, but it's worth > checking, as a lingering `

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1's pg_upgrade fails on Windows XP

First: Best. Bug. Report. Ever. Comments inline, though I don't know enough about the Windows side to help much. Checking for contrib/isn with bigint-passing mismatch ok Creating catalog dump The process cannot access the file because it i

[BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1's pg_upgrade fails on Windows XP

(Sending this again to pgsql-bugs with no attachments; hopefully it'll be accepted. Apologies for any duplicates! I'll provide the attachments if you need them, though I suspect things may become clear without them.) Hello, I'm forwarding this to pgsql-bugs after sending it to pgsql-testers. I'

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1's pg_upgrade fails on Windows XP

On 05/22/2012 06:28 AM, Edmund Horner wrote: Hum. My first email sent to this list a few days ago still has not arrived, so these two are kind of orphaned. Should I resend it? You mean: "Just a note that pg_upgrade on Windows 7 64-bit did not have this error. However, it was a different dat

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1's pg_upgrade fails on Windows XP

Hum. My first email sent to this list a few days ago still has not arrived, so these two are kind of orphaned. Should I resend it? -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1's pg_upgrade fails on Windows XP

On 18 May 2012 23:06, Edmund Horner wrote: > I ran into a bit of trouble running pg_upgrade to upgrade from my > 9.1.3 cluster.  This is the first time I have run pg_upgrade.  It is > entirely possible I've done something wrong. > > As a control, I was able to successfully  "upgrade" the Postgresq

Re: [BUGS] postgresql 9.1 replicaiton query ( GNU/Linux replicate to Windows)

Christopher Browne wrote: > Nie, Guocong wrote: >> Could you please let me know how can I replicate database from >> Linux to Windows ? > > The built-in replication requires that you are using the same > version of PostgreSQL on the same OS platform. That doesn't seem > to be documented as cl

Re: [BUGS] postgresql 9.1 replicaiton query ( GNU/Linux replicate to Windows)

On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 5:31 AM, Nie, Guocong wrote: > Hi Team, > > I am doing postgresql 9.1  replication , the Master database is on GNU/Linux > operation system , the Slave  database is on Windows 32 bit system.  But > when I copy the Master database from Linux to Windows , then I am unlucky to

[BUGS] postgresql 9.1 replicaiton query ( GNU/Linux replicate to Windows)

Hi Team, I am doing postgresql 9.1 replication , the Master database is on GNU/Linux operation system , the Slave database is on Windows 32 bit system. But when I copy the Master database from Linux to Windows , then I am unlucky to bringup database on windows system. Could you please let me

Re: [BUGS] Postgresql 9.1.2 - abnormal memory usage

Hi, On Friday, December 16, 2011 01:50:03 PM Havasvölgyi Ottó wrote: > A simple query "insert into mytable default values" on a single > serial-column table also leaks. It can also produced by pgbench. On > Windows and Linux too. Youve mentioned that in several threads now. If you really think th

Re: [BUGS] Postgresql 9.1.2 - abnormal memory usage

Hi, A simple query "insert into mytable default values" on a single serial-column table also leaks. It can also produced by pgbench. On Windows and Linux too. Best regards, Otto 2011/12/12 Jochen Erwied > Monday, December 12, 2011, 12:33:03 PM you wrote: > > > On 12.12.2011 13:16, Matteo Bec

Re: [BUGS] Postgresql 9.1.2 - abnormal memory usage

Monday, December 12, 2011, 12:33:03 PM you wrote: > On 12.12.2011 13:16, Matteo Beccati wrote: >> Just to clarify, am I correct assuming that the issue does not affect >> tables which have non-indexed inet fields? > Hmm, I think it might also affect queries that do large merge joins on > inet f

Re: [BUGS] Postgresql 9.1.2 - abnormal memory usage

On 12.12.2011 13:16, Matteo Beccati wrote: On 12/12/2011 09:29, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: On 12.12.2011 08:26, Tom Lane wrote: Andres Freund writes: In 3b8161723c645853021b57330dd2ea0484ec6131 Heikki made DatumGetInetP unpack toasted values. Unfortunately the btree support functions for the

Re: [BUGS] Postgresql 9.1.2 - abnormal memory usage

Hi Heikki, On 12/12/2011 09:29, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 12.12.2011 08:26, Tom Lane wrote: >> Andres Freund writes: >>> In 3b8161723c645853021b57330dd2ea0484ec6131 Heikki made DatumGetInetP >>> unpack >>> toasted values. Unfortunately the btree support functions for the >>> inet type >>> di

Re: [BUGS] Postgresql 9.1.2 - abnormal memory usage

On 12.12.2011 08:26, Tom Lane wrote: Andres Freund writes: In 3b8161723c645853021b57330dd2ea0484ec6131 Heikki made DatumGetInetP unpack toasted values. Unfortunately the btree support functions for the inet type didn't free memory which they have to do in contrast to about everything else. I

Re: [BUGS] Postgresql 9.1.2 - abnormal memory usage

Monday, December 12, 2011, 1:45:42 AM you wrote: > Jochen, could you try the attached patch? Patch is missing a variable define for 'r' in network_sup(). Fixed patch attached. Memory usage for insert ~1087MB - no change Memory usage for index creation ~415MB - fixed. Memory usage for select ~15

Re: [BUGS] Postgresql 9.1.2 - abnormal memory usage

Andres Freund writes: > In 3b8161723c645853021b57330dd2ea0484ec6131 Heikki made DatumGetInetP unpack > toasted values. Unfortunately the btree support functions for the inet type > didn't free memory which they have to do in contrast to about everything else. > I fixed a few more functions than

Re: [BUGS] Postgresql 9.1.2 - abnormal memory usage

Hi, On Monday, December 12, 2011 12:45:23 AM Andres Freund wrote: > On Sunday, December 11, 2011 10:15:29 PM Jochen Erwied wrote: > > The following script can be used to show the behaviour: > > > > create database pgtest; > > \c pgtest > > create table test(var inet); > > insert into test(var) '1

Re: [BUGS] Postgresql 9.1.2 - abnormal memory usage

Hi, On Sunday, December 11, 2011 10:15:29 PM Jochen Erwied wrote: > The following script can be used to show the behaviour: > > create database pgtest; > \c pgtest > create table test(var inet); > insert into test(var) '127.0.0.0'::inet+generate_series(0,256*256*256-1); > create index test_ix on

[BUGS] Postgresql 9.1.2 - abnormal memory usage

After upgrading from 9.1.1 to 9.1.2, memory usage for some queries increased to the amount that the OOM-killer on Linux terminated the server. Further investigation show the problem to occur under multiple circumstances: - copying data from an external file into a table with indexes - creating in

Re: [BUGS] Postgresql ACID bug?

On 30/08/2011 9:18 PM, Jan Snelders wrote: The program now selects and prints the records from the SELECT transaction. (0 records printed, we expected one record since we are still within the SELECT transaction which started while this record was still available) This isn't a bug. You're using

Re: [BUGS] Postgresql ACID bug?

Jan Snelders wrote: > I wrote small java program which performs some selects in one > transaction (and thread) and one delete in another transaction and > thread on the same table holding one record initially. > The DELETE transaction commits. > The program now selects and > prints the record

[BUGS] Postgresql ACID bug?

Introduction I wrote small java program which performs some selects in one transaction (and thread) and one delete in another transaction and thread on the same table holding one record initially. ENVIRONMENT OS: Centos 5.5 kernel 2.6.18-194.32.1.el5 Postgresql: 9.0.4 jdbc driver: 9.0-801 JDBC

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 8.4

On 3/08/2011 12:11 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote: Glonet NV / Mathieu Aras wrote: Can we install PostgreSQL 8.4 on a server 2008? Is it X64 and X32 compatible? This is not a bug. A more appropriate list for this question would have been pgsql-general. I'm not sure what "server 2008" is, but if

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 8.4

Glonet NV / Mathieu Aras wrote: > Can we install PostgreSQL 8.4 on a server 2008? Is it X64 and X32 > compatible? This is not a bug. A more appropriate list for this question would have been pgsql-general. I'm not sure what "server 2008" is, but if it's some form of Windows, version 8.4 sh

[BUGS] PostgreSQL 8.4

Dear sir, Can we install PostgreSQL 8.4 on a server 2008? Is it X64 and X32 compatible? Best Regards, Mathieu Mathieu Aras Systeembeheer & Ondersteuning math...@glonet.be http://www.glonet.be Glonet NV Beverestraat 59 B-9700 Oudenaarde tel: +

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL fails to build with 32bit MinGW-w64

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 7:51 PM, kmx wrote: > couple of weeks (maybe months) ago postgresql introduced support for > mingw-w64 compiler on > MS Windows platform; however the related patch was based on assumption that > mingw-w64 project delivers just 64bit compiler (which is not true - they > deli

[BUGS] PostgreSQL fails to build with 32bit MinGW-w64

Hi, couple of weeks ago postgresql introduced support for mingw-w64 compiler on MS Windows platform; however the related patch was based on assumption that mingw-w64 project delivers just 64bit compiler (which is not true - they deliver both 32/64bit compilers). According to my testing - postgres

[BUGS] PostgreSQL fails to build with 32bit MinGW-w64

Hi, couple of weeks (maybe months) ago postgresql introduced support for mingw-w64 compiler on MS Windows platform; however the related patch was based on assumption that mingw-w64 project delivers just 64bit compiler (which is not true - they deliver both 32/64bit compilers). According to my t

Re: [BUGS] Postgresql 9.0.4 initdb bug on solaris 64 bit

Gary Wong writes: > [Environment under in the postgres account] > $ env > LC_MONETARY=en_US.ISO8859-15 > LC_TIME=en_US.ISO8859-15 > LC_MESSAGES=C > LC_CTYPE=en_US.ISO8859-1 > LC_COLLATE=en_US.ISO8859-15 > LC_NUMERIC=en_US.ISO8859-15 > [Message I get when I run initdb] > $ initdb -D /usr/local/pgs

[BUGS] Postgresql 9.0.4 initdb bug on solaris 64 bit

Hi, I'm trying to install Postgresql 9.0.4 on solaris but ran into problems when trying to run the "initdb" command under the postgres Unix account. [Server OS Version] Oracle Solaris 10 9/10 s10s_u9wos_14a SPARC Copyright (c) 2010, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.1beta 1 Some domains not being able to be auto cast to their base type

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote: > On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:37 AM, Craig Ringer > wrote: >> On 05/24/2011 07:05 PM, Paragon Corporation wrote: >>> >>> In regression testing PostGIS 2.0, our topology module regression tests >>> are >>> failing in PostgreSQL 9.1 beta. >>> >>>

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.1beta 1 Some domains not being able to be auto cast to their base type

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:37 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: > On 05/24/2011 07:05 PM, Paragon Corporation wrote: >> >> In regression testing PostGIS 2.0, our topology module regression tests >> are >> failing in PostgreSQL 9.1 beta. >> >> We have a PostGIS ticket open for it here, but we suspect it's a >

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.1beta 1 Some domains not being able to be auto cast to their base type

On 05/24/2011 07:05 PM, Paragon Corporation wrote: In regression testing PostGIS 2.0, our topology module regression tests are failing in PostgreSQL 9.1 beta. We have a PostGIS ticket open for it here, but we suspect it's a PostgreSQL 9.1 bug and would like to close it out. Do you think you mi

[BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.1beta 1 Some domains not being able to be auto cast to their base type

In regression testing PostGIS 2.0, our topology module regression tests are failing in PostgreSQL 9.1 beta. We have a PostGIS ticket open for it here, but we suspect it's a PostgreSQL 9.1 bug and would like to close it out. http://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ticket/980 Our domain type is defined as:

Re: [BUGS] postgresql 9.0.3: parallel restore fails with comments on indices

Arnd Hannemann writes: > if pg_restore is used with -jN it fails if the dump has comments on indices. Reproduced here, thanks for the report! > The problem seems to be a false assumption in pg_backup_archiver.c: > ... > Comments are in SECTION_NONE so they get restored here regardless of > depe

[BUGS] postgresql 9.0.3: parallel restore fails with comments on indices

Hi, postgres version: 9.0.3 OS: debian squeeze 64bit if pg_restore is used with -jN it fails if the dump has comments on indices. Steps to reproduce (db testdb): CREATE DATABASE testdb; \c testdb CREATE TABLE tab (id INT); INSERT INTO tab VALUES (1); CREATE INDEX idx ON tab USING btree (id); CO

Re: [BUGS] postgresql-8.4 error

Hello Mohammed, Mohammed Rashad [2010-11-29 20:50 +0530]: > I reinstalled the postgresql and got this error > * Starting PostgreSQL 8.4 database server >* Insecure directory in $ENV{PATH} while running with -T switch at > /usr/bin/pg_ctlcluster line 63. This is not an upstream bug at all. Ca

Re: [BUGS] postgresql-8.4 error

I reinstalled the postgresql and got this error * Starting PostgreSQL 8.4 database server * Insecure directory in $ENV{PATH} while running with -T switch at /usr/bin/pg_ctlcluster line 63. On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 8:43 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > Mohammed Rashad wrote: > > > I am getting th

Re: [BUGS] postgresql-8.4 error

Mohammed Rashad wrote: > I am getting this error > > * Starting PostgreSQL 8.4 database server > * Error: could not exec > /usr/lib/postgresql/8.4/bin/pg_ctl > /usr/lib/postgresql/8.4/bin/pg_ctl start -D > /var/lib/postgresql/8.4/main -l > /var/log/postg

[BUGS] postgresql-8.4 error

I am running ubuntu 10.04 I have problem installing postgresql-8.4 when i tried to start postgresql /etc/init.d/postgresql-8.4 start I am getting this error * Starting PostgreSQL 8.4 database server * Error: could not exec /usr/lib/postgresql/8.4/bin/pg_c

[BUGS] postgresql install failure on Ubuntu 10.10

Hi, I tried to install postgresql-8.4 from sources on a custom Ubuntu 10.10 liveCD. I get an error during the installation process: [...] Configuring postgresql.conf to use port 5432... update-alternatives: using /usr/share/postgresql/8.4/man/man1/postmaster.1.gz to provide /usr/share/man/man1

Re: [BUGS] Postgresql installation on P2020 board

Excerpts from TamilSelvam M's message of jue sep 23 02:08:05 -0400 2010: > creating template1 database in /usr/local/data/base/1 ... FATAL: only sys > attr supported in caches is OID > PANIC: cannot abort transaction 1, it was already committed > child process was terminated by signal 6: Aborte

Re: [BUGS] Postgresql installation on P2020 board

TamilSelvam M writes: > im trying to install postgresql8.4 in P2020 board . > when i try to start postgresql im facing the follwing error. > creating template1 database in /usr/local/data/base/1 ... FATAL: only sys > attr supported in caches is OID Offhand I'd guess you have a compiler bug to

[BUGS] Postgresql installation on P2020 board

Hi, im trying to install postgresql8.4 in P2020 board . when i try to start postgresql im facing the follwing error. [postg...@p2020ds /]$ initdb -D /usr/local/data/ The files belonging to this database system will be owned by user "postgres". This user must also own the server process. The data

Re: [BUGS] postgresql 8.3 on ubuntu 8.10 uppgrade,remove,or reinstall problem

On 4/07/2010 3:00 PM, pritesh modi wrote: * Unpacking postgresql-common (from .../postgresql-common_90_all.deb) ... Setting up postgresql-common (90) ... supported_versions: WARNING: Unknown Ubuntu release: 8.10* This is not a PostgreSQL bug. It's looks like a problem with the packages yo

Re: [BUGS] postgresql 8.3 on ubuntu 8.10 uppgrade,remove,or reinstall problem

On 04/07/10 01:04, pritesh modi wrote: > Hello > > i am not understanding regarding this bug what s problem with that its not > allowed to start the postgresql successfully what is a problem that coud not > easily find out Please provide error messages reported on the console, any information fr

[BUGS] postgresql 8.3 on ubuntu 8.10 uppgrade,remove,or reinstall problem

Hello i am not understanding regarding this bug what s problem with that its not allowed to start the postgresql successfully what is a problem that coud not easily find out i reinstall and install the packages again and again but could not the solution here is the same links i check and also f

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.0b1 - Error when checking table sizes

* Thom Brown (thombr...@gmail.com) wrote: > psql -U postgres -d test -c "select tablename, > pg_size_pretty(pg_table_size(tablename::regclass)) from pg_tables > where schemaname = 'public' order by tablename;" > > And this, for some reason, works... which is how I did it the other > day (hence why

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.0b1 - Error when checking table sizes

On 27 May 2010 23:00, Tom Lane wrote: > Thom Brown writes: >> This probably isn't a legitimate bug, but as a precaution >> I'm running the following command against PostgreSQL 9.0 beta 1: > >> psql -U postgres -d test -c "select tablename, >> pg_size_pretty(pg_table_size(tablename::regclass))

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.0b1 - Error when checking table sizes

Thom Brown writes: > This probably isn't a legitimate bug, but as a precaution > I'm running the following command against PostgreSQL 9.0 beta 1: > psql -U postgres -d test -c "select tablename, > pg_size_pretty(pg_table_size(tablename::regclass)) from pg_tables > order by tablename;" > And

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.0b1 - Error when checking table sizes

On tor, 2010-05-27 at 22:41 +0100, Thom Brown wrote: > This probably isn't a legitimate bug, but as a precaution > > I'm running the following command against PostgreSQL 9.0 beta 1: > > psql -U postgres -d test -c "select tablename, > pg_size_pretty(pg_table_size(tablename::regclass)) from pg

[BUGS] PostgreSQL 9.0b1 - Error when checking table sizes

This probably isn't a legitimate bug, but as a precaution I'm running the following command against PostgreSQL 9.0 beta 1: psql -U postgres -d test -c "select tablename, pg_size_pretty(pg_table_size(tablename::regclass)) from pg_tables order by tablename;" And getting the following message:

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 8.4 - dumping database connection privileges

On 03/05/10 01:30, Tom Lane wrote: > Russell Smith writes: > >> On 02/05/10 01:36, Tom Lane wrote: >> >>> No, that's the intended place for them given the current division of >>> labor between pg_dump and pg_dumpall. There have been complaints before >>> about this, but no one has propose

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 8.4 - dumping database connection privileges

Russell Smith writes: > On 02/05/10 01:36, Tom Lane wrote: >> No, that's the intended place for them given the current division of >> labor between pg_dump and pg_dumpall. There have been complaints before >> about this, but no one has proposed a better approach (where better >> means "fixes this

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 8.4 - dumping database connection privileges

On 02/05/10 01:36, Tom Lane wrote: > Russell Smith writes: > >> Is this considered a bug that the only way to do a dump/restore with >> database privileges is to use pg_dumpall? >> > No, that's the intended place for them given the current division of > labor between pg_dump and pg_dumpall

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 8.4 - dumping database connection privileges

Russell Smith writes: > Is this considered a bug that the only way to do a dump/restore with > database privileges is to use pg_dumpall? No, that's the intended place for them given the current division of labor between pg_dump and pg_dumpall. There have been complaints before about this, but no

[BUGS] PostgreSQL 8.4 - dumping database connection privileges

Hi, I've recently upgraded to PostgreSQL 8.4 as Redhat had begun supporting it. I have tried to dump database grants, but have only found an obscure way to do it. I would expect; postgres$ pg_dump -Fc database_name > backup.pgdump would include all of the GRANT CONNECT on database_name TO "Rol

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL 8.4.3: configure script on Debian Lenny with libbsd-dev and libbsd0 installed does not detect strlcpy and strlcat functions

Holger Rauch writes: > So, my question is: Why does the configure script not include these > checks on Linux systems (for the bsd/string.h file and libbsd)? Well, there are several reasons: 1. I don't think we really care that much --- the src/port/ implementations of those functions work fine,

[BUGS] PostgreSQL 8.4.3: configure script on Debian Lenny with libbsd-dev and libbsd0 installed does not detect strlcpy and strlcat functions

Hi to everybody, on a Debian Lenny system I got the error mentioned above, i. e. configure reported "no" for both functions, even though the two BSD compatibility packages mentioned in the subject are installed. Both functions are declared in /usr/include/bsd/string.h When including that header

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required?

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 8:50 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Robert Haas escribió: >> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:09 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> > What I'd be for is breaking the docs out as a separate top-level target, >> > ie "make docs", "make install-docs".  I don't much care for Lou's >> > suggestion

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required?

Robert Haas escribió: > On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:09 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > > What I'd be for is breaking the docs out as a separate top-level target, > > ie "make docs", "make install-docs".  I don't much care for Lou's > > suggestion of tying it to a configure option because that imposes the > >

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required?

On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 9:21 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > By splitting out the doc building into a separate target, we will have > less users installing the documentation. I don't see why. And even if it's true, it just means some people were installing the docs "by accident" before even though

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required?

On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:09 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut writes: >> On tor, 2010-03-04 at 17:53 +, Lou Picciano wrote: >>> ./configure --no-docs   or ./configure --with-htmldocs-only > >> But that would be a negative regression for end users, who we want to >> have the docs availabl

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required?

On fre, 2010-03-05 at 08:09 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut writes: > > On tor, 2010-03-04 at 17:53 +, Lou Picciano wrote: > >> ./configure --no-docs or ./configure --with-htmldocs-only > > > But that would be a negative regression for end users, who we want to > > have the docs

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required?

obert Haas" , "Joe Conway" , pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org Sent: Friday, March 5, 2010 8:09:54 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required? Peter Eisentraut writes: > On tor, 2010-03-04 at 17:53 +, Lou Picciano wrote: >> ./confi

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required?

Peter Eisentraut writes: > On tor, 2010-03-04 at 17:53 +, Lou Picciano wrote: >> ./configure --no-docs or ./configure --with-htmldocs-only > But that would be a negative regression for end users, who we want to > have the docs available by default, so they can read them. "End users" in th

Re: [BUGS] PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required?

On tor, 2010-03-04 at 17:53 +, Lou Picciano wrote: > While I'd agree a 'make all' should, uh... make _all_, and that make > building based on lots of guessing is counterintuitive, an option to > configure like: > > ./configure --no-docs or ./configure --with-htmldocs-only > > - with som

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >