Nope. It's an intensive OLAP data-warehouse with queries hanging in waits
for hours.
>From the vacuum full error and commit file which is gone due to the
supposedly moved age mark,
It looks more like a bug and not an IO error.
Rado
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 2:38 AM Jeremy Schneider
wrote:
>
> On
Thomas Kellerer writes:
> Tom Lane schrieb am 20.07.2020 um 20:04:
>> Yeah, duplicate keys does seem odd here. Can you provide a self
>> contained example?
> I'll try, but this is a production system.
> Extracting the necessary anonymous data will be tricky.
If this is a PG bug, it should be po
Tom Lane schrieb am 21.07.2020 um 09:39:
> In any case, we do offer as standard advice that you should reproduce
> a problem on the latest minor release before filing a bug report.
I know ;)
I already told the "powers to be" and it's being addressed
(I also went through the 11.x release notes, bu
Guten Tag Christophe Pettus,
am Montag, 20. Juli 2020 um 19:21 schrieben Sie:
> On a database with multiple users, you can't just get away
> with changing the ownership of the types; you have to make sure that
> the USAGE is granted appropriately to other users.
If a user specifies "--no-owner" a
Hi All,
Our project uses each database for tenant, But how can we restrict
tenant resources?
Ex: Tenent1 has to use 20% resource and Tenent2 has to use 10% resource,
how can we restrict users like this.
Thanks and Regards,
Vasu Madhineni
On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 2:50 PM Laurenz Albe
wrote:
> On
On 7/20/20 10:42 PM, Thomas Kellerer wrote:
Adrian Klaver schrieb am 20.07.2020 um 16:45:
On 7/20/20 7:22 AM, Thomas Kellerer wrote:
I have a strange error when using logical replication between a 11.2
Where is "xxx_pkey" coming from, e.g. sequence?
No, as mentioned, those are varchar(2
Hi all,
We are running 9.6, and we are planning to move some primary keys from int
to bigint because we are approaching the type limit. We understand this
requires some downtime, but we want to know if there are things we can do
to limit it.
Here are our steps, with questions at the end.
ALTER T
Hi All,
Planning to build standalone postgres and with pgpool as connection pooler
in docker containers.
Shall we try option like installing pgpool in one docker container and
postgres in another docker container, is it possible?
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Vasu Madhineni
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 7:47 AM Vasu Madhineni
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Our project uses each database for tenant, But how can we restrict
> tenant resources?
> Ex: Tenent1 has to use 20% resource and Tenent2 has to use 10% resource,
> how can we restrict users like this.
>
See https://wiki.postgres
On 7/21/20 8:30 AM, Mohamed Wael Khobalatte wrote:
Hi all,
We are running 9.6, and we are planning to move some primary keys from
int to bigint because we are approaching the type limit. We understand
this requires some downtime, but we want to know if there are things we
can do to limit it.
On 7/21/20 11:17 AM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 7/21/20 8:30 AM, Mohamed Wael Khobalatte wrote:
Hi all,
> test_(aklaver)5432> alter table change_seq alter COLUMN id set data type
bigint;
ALTER TABLE
test_(aklaver)5432> \d change_seq
Table "public.change_seq"
Colum
Curious- what requires that the unique index be declared a primary key?
What advantage does that give you? Just ensuring it isn't null?
Side note- EOL for 9.6 is coming next year so just a plug for upgrading
when possible, perhaps utilizing pglogical to get to v11 or 12.
>
> > test_(aklaver)5432> alter table change_seq alter COLUMN id set data
type
> bigint;
> ALTER TABLE
> test_(aklaver)5432> \d change_seq
> Table "public.change_seq"
> Column | Type | Collation | Nullable |Default
> ++---+
On 7/21/20 2:18 PM, Mohamed Wael Khobalatte wrote:
> test_(aklaver)5432> alter table change_seq alter COLUMN id set data type
bigint;
ALTER TABLE
test_(aklaver)5432> \d change_seq
Table "public.change_seq"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable |
> Yeah, I thought the int --> bigint would not do a table rewrite. Testing
> showed otherwise. Forget that idea.
Got it. Not sure what else we should consider. It seemed like the
constraint might be possible, but currently need a far bigger table to be
able to tell for sure, since we can't explain
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 10:46 PM Vasu Madhineni
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Planning to build standalone postgres and with pgpool as connection pooler
> in docker containers.
> Shall we try option like installing pgpool in one docker container and
> postgres in another docker container, is it possible?
Adrian Klaver schrieb am 21.07.2020 um 17:07:
>> No, as mentioned, those are varchar(20) columns.
>> The values are generated by the application (no default value defined for
>> the column)
>
> Aah I see my mistake I was going off your follow up question not the
> original post. In that original p
17 matches
Mail list logo
