Hi Experts
I have seen that logical replication slots created automatically by Postgres
during initial sync (a slot per table), are marked as "wal_status = lost" and
"active = false".
1. Who is responsible for removing those faulty replication slots?
2. Can a slot with "wal_status = lo
On 2024-08-27 11:50, David Rowley wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 at 13:40, Tom Lane wrote:
Yeah, it looks like that condition on "table_name" is not getting
pushed down to the scan level anymore. I'm not sure why not,
but will look closer tomorrow.
I was looking for the offending commit as at fi
On Tue, 2024-08-20 at 12:35 -0400, William Kaper wrote:
> We have a set of operational tables that are all partitioned by organization
> ID
> (customer ID) in the 100M row range. We also have 3-4 composite indexes on
> these
> tables that currently do not include the organization ID. Any queries
David Rowley writes:
> On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 at 13:40, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yeah, it looks like that condition on "table_name" is not getting
>> pushed down to the scan level anymore. I'm not sure why not,
>> but will look closer tomorrow.
> So looks like it was the "Make Vars be outer-join-aware."
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 at 13:40, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah, it looks like that condition on "table_name" is not getting
> pushed down to the scan level anymore. I'm not sure why not,
> but will look closer tomorrow.
I was looking for the offending commit as at first I thought it might
be related to Me
nikhil raj writes:
> I've encountered a noticeable difference in execution time and query
> execution plan row counts between PostgreSQL 13 and PostgreSQL 16 when
> running a query on information_schema tables. Surprisingly, PostgreSQL 16
> is performing slower than PostgreSQL 13.
Yeah, it looks
On Tue, Aug 27, 2024, 5:09 AM Chris Travers wrote:
> This message is being sent from the Community Code of Conduct Committee,
> with the approval of the Core Team.
>
> As part of the Community CoC policy, the Committee membership is to be
> refreshed on an annual basis. We are seeking up to 3 vol
On 8/26/24 15:41, nikhil raj wrote:
Hi Adrian,
Thanks for the quick response.
I've already performed a vacuum, reindex, and analyze on the entire
database, but the issue persists. As you can see from the execution
plan, the time difference in PostgreSQL 16 is still significantly
higher, even
Hi Adrian,
Thanks for the quick response.
I've already performed a vacuum, reindex, and analyze on the entire
database, but the issue persists. As you can see from the execution plan,
the time difference in PostgreSQL 16 is still significantly higher, even
after all maintenance activities have be
This message is being sent from the Community Code of Conduct Committee,
with the approval of the Core Team.
As part of the Community CoC policy, the Committee membership is to be
refreshed on an annual basis. We are seeking up to 3 volunteers to serve on
the Committee for the coming year, October
On 8/26/24 14:49, nikhil raj wrote:
Hi All,
I've encountered a noticeable difference in execution time and query
execution plan row counts between PostgreSQL 13 and PostgreSQL 16 when
running a query on |information_schema| tables. Surprisingly, PostgreSQL
16 is performing slower than Postgre
The Code of Conduct Committee is currently operating at reduced capacity
due to multiple departures this year, and therefore acting with the minimum
membership allowed by the code of conduct.
Our current membership is noted at
https://www.postgresql.org/about/policies/coc_committee/
Alexandra Abr
On 8/22/24 11:13, Justin Giacobbi wrote:
I have an issue that on the surface seems orthogonal to existing functionality. I’m trying to
dynamically update validity ranges as new s replace old s.
In a nutshell the problem looks like this:
psqlprompt=# select * from rangetest;
id |
On 8/26/24 04:33, Jyoti Saxena wrote:
Hi Ray,
I appreciate the clarification regarding the release status of
PostgreSQL 17. Understanding that it is currently in the beta phase, I
am eager to integrate this version into my development and testing
workflows.
Could you please assist me by pro
Aggressive autoanalyze and autovacuum settings solve most query problems.
These are my settings:
default_statistics_target = 5000
autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor = 0.015
autovacuum_vacuum_threshold = 250
autovacuum_analyze_scale_factor = 0.015
autovacuum_analyze_threshold = 250
Such a high default_
On 26/08/2024 12:33, Jyoti Saxena wrote:
Hi Ray,
I appreciate the clarification regarding the release status of
PostgreSQL 17. Understanding that it is currently in the beta phase, I
am eager to integrate this version into my development and testing
workflows.
Could you please assist me by
Hi Ray,
I appreciate the clarification regarding the release status of PostgreSQL
17. Understanding that it is currently in the beta phase, I am eager to
integrate this version into my development and testing workflows.
Could you please assist me by providing the following information:
- Inst
On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 3:54 PM Jyoti Saxena
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Thank you for the suggestion to compile PostgreSQL from source. However, I
> am currently looking for a way to install PostgreSQL 17 through a package
> manager or a precompiled version that can be more seamlessly integrated and
> m
On 26/08/2024 11:43, Ray O'Donnell wrote:
On 26/08/2024 07:52, Jyoti Saxena wrote:
Hi,
I’m encountering an issue while trying to install PostgreSQL 17 on my
Ubuntu 22.04 (Jammy) system. I followed the installation instructions
from the official PostgreSQL website
https://www.postgresql.org/
Hello,
Thank you for the suggestion to compile PostgreSQL from source. However, I
am currently looking for a way to install PostgreSQL 17 through a package
manager or a precompiled version that can be more seamlessly integrated and
managed in my environment.
Could you please confirm if PostgreSQL
On 26/08/2024 07:52, Jyoti Saxena wrote:
Hi,
I’m encountering an issue while trying to install PostgreSQL 17 on my
Ubuntu 22.04 (Jammy) system. I followed the installation instructions
from the official PostgreSQL website
https://www.postgresql.org/download/linux/ubuntu/.
I don't know wh
To compile PG from code follow the below instructions.
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/install-make.html
Thanks
Kashif Zeeshan
On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 3:30 PM Kashif Zeeshan
wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 3:19 PM Jyoti Saxena
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Kashif,
>>
>> Thank you for the instr
Hello!
We have a couple of queries that all of a sudden became rather slow. I
took explain analyze from one of the SQLs as bdlow. Can you please check
and suggest if anything can be done?
'-> Table scan on (actual time=0.019..71.526 rows=38622
loops=1)\n
-> Aggregate using temporary table (act
On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 3:19 PM Jyoti Saxena
wrote:
> Hi Kashif,
>
> Thank you for the instructions. I followed the steps provided to set up
> the repository and install PostgreSQL. However, after completing the setup,
> the system installed PostgreSQL 16.4 instead of the expected PostgreSQL 17.
Thanks Tom. Collecting full stats on the tables involved corrected the
execution.
On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 9:57 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Siraj G writes:
> > We migrated a PgSQL database from Cloud SQL to compute engine and since
> > then there is a SQL we observed taking a long time. After some stud
Hi Kashif,
Thank you for the instructions. I followed the steps provided to set up the
repository and install PostgreSQL. However, after completing the setup, the
system installed PostgreSQL 16.4 instead of the expected PostgreSQL 17. The
version installed is psql (PostgreSQL) 16.4 (Ubuntu 16.4-1.
Hi Jyoti
Make sure you have done the following repo setup
sudo apt install curl ca-certificates
sudo install -d /usr/share/postgresql-common/pgdg
sudo curl -o /usr/share/postgresql-common/pgdg/apt.postgresql.org.asc
--fail https://www.postgresql.org/media/keys/ACCC4CF8.asc
# Create the repositor
27 matches
Mail list logo
