On ons, 2012-05-30 at 23:43 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 30.5.2012 23:19, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I suspect it depends on how you install the new version of the library,
> > too. I would somewhat expect it to work as you're thinking if the
> > install consists of "rename old file out of the way, co
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 3:29 AM, Andrzej Krawiec
wrote:
> Ok, we've managed to do strace -s during such a situation (see
> attached file). I have no clue what can it mean. Only errors count is
> quite strange.
How long was strace -s run for to generate this?
> Could this
> http://postgresql.104
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:48 PM, wrote:
> The following bug has been logged on the website:
>
> Bug reference: 6659
> Logged by: Junho Kim
> Email address: junho1@lge.com
> PostgreSQL version: 9.0.4
> Operating system: Windows XP 32bit ServicePack 3
> Description:
>
> I
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Chris Ruprecht wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> I was compiling 9.2beta1 - but that wasn't an option when submitting the
> issue.
> I can compile the 9.1.x versions just fine.
>
> Below is a list of the uuid.h files on the system.
> It appears, that the file being used is
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:34:16PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> My point is that plpython_call_handler is defined in the public and
> pg_catalog schema, as are other language handlers.
>
> In fact, an argument could be made that the bug is really in pg_dump.
> When we moved the language handlers
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 6671
Logged by: Ed Muller
Email address: edw...@heroku.com
PostgreSQL version: 9.0.7
Operating system: Linux (Ubuntu 10.04)
Description:
We have this thing where we kill the restore command sometimes, to
Why is cost_hashjoin estimating 50 billion tuple comparisons for 10K rows of
output though?
From: Tom Lane
To: postgresu...@yahoo.com
Cc: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 10:03 PM
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #6668: hashjoin cost problem
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 6669
Logged by: jose soares
Email address: jose.soa...@sferacarta.com
PostgreSQL version: 8.4.8
Operating system: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, debian
Description:
Hi,
I think I have found an error in pg or at l
Hi Robert,
I did some experimenting.
I have uuid.h from the OSSP uuid page, version 1.6.2 installed.
Removed /usr/local/include/uuid.h
rebuilt and re-installed the package.
Same error - but also in 9.1.
So I copied /usr/include/uuid/uuid.h to /usr/local/include/uuid.h and the error
went away:
ch
Ok, we've managed to do strace -s during such a situation (see
attached file). I have no clue what can it mean. Only errors count is
quite strange.
Could this
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/high-CPU-usage-for-stats-collector-in-8-2-td1962590.html
affect our environment?
--
Andrzej Krawie
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 6670
Logged by: Roman
Email address: byg...@mail.ua
PostgreSQL version: Unsupported/Unknown
Operating system: Win32
Description:
Bruce, tell me PLEASE how make this in 7.3:
SELECT t.oid, format_type(t.
On 05/31/2012 11:53 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:34:16PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
OK, so what do people want me to do on this? Apply my pg_upgrade fix or
go for a more general fix that will prevent pg_dump from dumping out
these duplicate functions --- it would invo
Adrian Klaver writes:
> On 05/31/2012 11:53 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:34:16PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> OK, so what do people want me to do on this? Apply my pg_upgrade fix or
>> go for a more general fix that will prevent pg_dump from dumping out
>> these duplic
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 06:24:04PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Adrian Klaver writes:
> > On 05/31/2012 11:53 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:34:16PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> OK, so what do people want me to do on this? Apply my pg_upgrade fix or
> >> go for a more ge
Postgres User writes:
> Why is cost_hashjoin estimating 50 billion tuple comparisons for 10K rows of
> output though?
Well, if it hashes the smaller table, there's 100 million rows on the
outside, and each of them will probe one hash chain in the hash table.
If you're unlucky, each of those prob
edw...@heroku.com writes:
> We have this thing where we kill the restore command sometimes, to ensure
> it's not stuck.
Um, what makes you think that's a good idea?
> This has rarely led to postmaster dying afterwards instead of retrying.
"Rarely"? As I read the code, it will happen every sing
On 05/31/2012 03:30 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 06:24:04PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Hm, I'm not sure about that. The general charter of pg_dump is to
produce a dump that will replicate the state of the database.
Editorializing on it in order to make it more likely to reloa
On 31 May 2012 14:14, Edmund Horner wrote:
> Hello, apologies if this is already in your radar.
>
> I can successfully install the PostgreSQL 9.2 beta1 binaries on
> Windows XP and successfully perform most queries. However I've run
> into some trouble with the XML support.
>
> From a very cursor
On 1 June 2012 12:14, Edmund Horner wrote:
> I tried using an older libxml2.dll. Replace with the one from
> ftp://ftp.zlatkovic.com/libxml/oldreleases/libxml2-2.6.9.win32.zip
> (and copying zlib1.dll to zlib.dll), and it works.
>
> I note that the previous 9.1.3 binaries used the newer libxml2.d
On 1 June 2012 12:36, Edmund Horner wrote:
> On 1 June 2012 12:14, Edmund Horner wrote:
>> I tried using an older libxml2.dll. Replace with the one from
>> ftp://ftp.zlatkovic.com/libxml/oldreleases/libxml2-2.6.9.win32.zip
>> (and copying zlib1.dll to zlib.dll), and it works.
>>
>> I note that t
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 6672
Logged by: Anna Zaks
Email address: zaks.a...@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 9.1.3
Operating system: MacOSX
Description:
There are two memory leaks in dumputils (v9.2.0beta1):
1)
File: src/bin/scr
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 06:30:30PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Hm, I'm not sure about that. The general charter of pg_dump is to
> > produce a dump that will replicate the state of the database.
> > Editorializing on it in order to make it more likely to reload in a
> > different version of PG
jose.soa...@sferacarta.com writes:
> I think I have found an error in pg or at least inconsistency, take a look
> at this.
> I created an unique index on two columns and pg let me enter repeated values
> as NULLs (unknown value),
This is entirely correct per SQL standard: unique constraints do not
zaks.a...@gmail.com writes:
> The following bug has been logged on the website:
> Bug reference: 6672
> Logged by: Anna Zaks
> Email address: zaks.a...@gmail.com
> PostgreSQL version: 9.1.3
> Operating system: MacOSX
> Description:
> There are two memory leaks in dumpu
24 matches
Mail list logo
