Thanks all for the ideas, we have chosen to resolve this using Logical
Replication as we cannot use any other methods due to various constraints.
Regards,
Venkata B N
Database Consultant
On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 11:16 AM David Rowley wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 at 12:46, Venkata B Nagothi w
On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 at 12:46, Venkata B Nagothi wrote:
> Coming back to this thread after a while.. we have to remove OID on a 6 TB (5
> TB of indexes) table and ALTER TABLE is gonna block the table and is gonna
> take hours...
You may want to look into exploiting table inheritance for this.
So
Coming back to this thread after a while.. we have to remove OID on a 6 TB
(5 TB of indexes) table and ALTER TABLE is gonna block the table and is
gonna take hours...
We operate on pretty much 0 outage we do have a passive site on which
we will be doing the activity.. if not ALTER TABLE.. is t
On Sun, 16 May 2021 at 13:00, David G. Johnston
wrote:
>
> On Saturday, May 15, 2021, Venkata B Nagothi wrote:
>> Below is the query generating the error :
>>
>> STATEMENT: SELECT c.relname AS table_name, c.relhaspkey AS has_primary_key
>> FROM pg_catalog.pg_class c, pg_catalog.pg_namespace n W
On Saturday, May 15, 2021, Venkata B Nagothi wrote:
>
>
> *ERROR: column c.relhaspkey does not exist at character 33*
>
> Below is the query generating the error :
>
> STATEMENT: SELECT c.relname AS table_name, c.relhaspkey AS
> has_primary_key FROM pg_catalog.pg_class c, pg_catalog.pg_namespac
On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 9:26 AM Venkata B Nagothi wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 8 May 2021 at 1:47 pm, Laurenz Albe
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 2021-05-08 at 13:37 +1000, Venkata B Nagothi wrote:
>> > We are thinking to upgrade to PG 11 instead so that we can avoid doing
>> ALTER TABLE.. SET WITHOUT OIDs.
>> >
On Sat, 8 May 2021 at 1:47 pm, Laurenz Albe
wrote:
> On Sat, 2021-05-08 at 13:37 +1000, Venkata B Nagothi wrote:
> > We are thinking to upgrade to PG 11 instead so that we can avoid doing
> ALTER TABLE.. SET WITHOUT OIDs.
> > Does that makes sense ? Please advise if there are any gotchas !
>
> I
On Sat, 2021-05-08 at 13:37 +1000, Venkata B Nagothi wrote:
> We are thinking to upgrade to PG 11 instead so that we can avoid doing ALTER
> TABLE.. SET WITHOUT OIDs.
> Does that makes sense ? Please advise if there are any gotchas !
It makes sense, but it means that you will have to face the sa
Missed including pgsql-general group.
On Sat, 8 May 2021 at 11:06 am, Venkata B Nagothi wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 9:22 am, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 07:49:29AM +1000, Venkata B Nagothi wrote:
>> > Hi There,
>> >
>> > We are attempting to upgrade our Postgres dat
On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 07:49:29AM +1000, Venkata B Nagothi wrote:
> Hi There,
>
> We are attempting to upgrade our Postgres databases from 9.5 to 12.5 using
> pg_upgrade link mode and are facing issues with OIDs.
>
> ALTER TABLE... SET WITHOUT OIDs on the larger tables is taking very long and
>
Hi There,
We are attempting to upgrade our Postgres databases from 9.5 to 12.5 using
pg_upgrade link mode and are facing issues with OIDs.
ALTER TABLE... SET WITHOUT OIDs on the larger tables is taking very long
and is locking up the table as well. We do have tables of more than 1 TB of
size.
Is
11 matches
Mail list logo
