On Mon, 2024-12-16 at 16:25 -0800, Will Storey wrote:
> I would like to disable vacuum's truncate behaviour for autovacuum.
> Previously I had an outage due to its access exclusive lock when it was
> replicated to a hot standby.
>
> When that outage happened it was from a VACUUM call in a cronjob
The scenario:
1. There is a postgresql 17 server running
2. Restore dump with `--single-transaction` flag
3. For whatever reason the server goes away (eg: we kill the process)
4. Now `base` directory is filled with abandoned table files which
postgresql know nothing about
Playground:
Terminal 1:
Hi!
I would like to disable vacuum's truncate behaviour for autovacuum.
Previously I had an outage due to its access exclusive lock when it was
replicated to a hot standby.
When that outage happened it was from a VACUUM call in a cronjob rather
than autovacuum. I now run such VACUUMs with TRUNCAT
TeamBeing dev server, I noticed, we haven't performed analyze/vacuum process.
Noticed and re-triggerred vacuum full and analyze for all the application
related db's
Re ran backup.
No issue's appeared during backup.
Not yet performed restoration in pgsql ver 15.09 in new vm with different OS.
Than
On 12/16/24 14:30, Bharani SV-forum wrote:
*a) *
*user = *
postgres
b)
*pg_dump version = *
/usr/bin/pg_dump -V
pg_dump (PostgreSQL) 13.16
c)
*DB version*
select version () ;
version
---
a) user = postgres
b)pg_dump version = /usr/bin/pg_dump -V
pg_dump (PostgreSQL) 13.16
c)
DB version
select version () ;
version--
PostgreSQL 13.
On 12/16/24 13:19, Bharani SV-forum wrote:
Team
I am getting the following error.
pg_dump: error: error reading large object 2113418:
pg_dump: error: could not open large object 3391830:
What user are you running pg_dump as?
What version of pg_dump?
I tried to give this command DB name =
TeamI am getting the following error.
pg_dump: error: error reading large object 2113418:
pg_dump: error: could not open large object 3391830:
I tried to give this command DB name = abcefg
ALTER DATABASE abcefgd SET lo_compat_privileges=on;
and reran and once again , i am getting the same error
On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 10:19 AM Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> On 2024-12-16 09:17:25 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > Local (socket-based) connections are typically peer-authenticated
> > (meaning that authentication is handled by Linux pam).
> ^^^
> Is it? I haven't
On 2024-12-16 09:17:25 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> Local (socket-based) connections are typically peer-authenticated
> (meaning that authentication is handled by Linux pam).
^^^
Is it? I haven't checked the source code, but this doesn't seem
plausible. You can g
Local (socket-based) connections are typically peer-authenticated (meaning
that authentication is handled by Linux pam).
Thus, if someone enters too many wrong passwords for a superuser account,
you *should* still be able to locally connect to PG.
Better test it, though.
On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at
On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 8:10 AM Greg Sabino Mullane
wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 5:32 AM 張宸瑋 wrote:
>
>> We have both regular accounts and system accounts. For regular accounts,
>> we still require password complexity and the lockout functionality after
>> multiple failed login attempts.
>>
On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 5:32 AM 張宸瑋 wrote:
> We have both regular accounts and system accounts. For regular accounts,
> we still require password complexity and the lockout functionality after
> multiple failed login attempts.
>
Again, what is the threat model here? Most people have their passwo
On 2024-12-16 18:32:34 +0800, 張宸瑋 wrote:
> We have both regular accounts and system accounts. For regular accounts, we
> still require password complexity and the lockout functionality after multiple
> failed login attempts. However, for system accounts, due to information
> security regulations, p
We have both regular accounts and system accounts. For regular accounts, we
still require password complexity and the lockout functionality after
multiple failed login attempts. However, for system accounts, due to
information security regulations, password complexity is also required. The
issue is
15 matches
Mail list logo
