Hi,
We are facing the following problem during the PostgreSQL 8.2.4 startup in a
Windows XP/SP2 box:
2008-03-31 13:35:12 1: LOG: database system was interrupted at 2008-03-31
09:45:44
2008-03-31 13:35:12 2: LOG: checkpoint record is at 0/7588FFD8
2008-03-31 13:35:12 3: LOG: redo record is
Hi,
I´ve noticed in my Fedora Core 6 box running PG 8.2.3 that column
current_query of pg_stat_activity view is not showing the complete query.
The complete query:
_
SELECT INT.DESMAT, INT.ESPMAT, INT.MON
> "Scott Marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On 10/11/07, Carlos H. Reimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> It=B4s "" but the "query_start" column is refreshed.
>
> > Then the query runs and finishes and the problem is so
> On 10/11/07, Carlos H. Reimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > "Carlos H. Reimer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > SELECT * or naming all the columns locks the client
> > > application. Yesterday
> > > > I´ve wrong
> "Carlos H. Reimer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > SELECT * or naming all the columns locks the client
> application. Yesterday
> > I´ve wrongly said that when naming all the columns instead of
> using the *
> > the applications did not lock.
>
&
Some new data about this issue:
SELECT * or naming all the columns locks the client application. Yesterday
I´ve wrongly said that when naming all the columns instead of using the *
the applications did not lock.
I can not reproduce the problem in others 8.2.4 servers. I´ve others 8.2.4
servers a
Hi Erik,
> Are all of these remote connections from the same machine? Did you
> upgrade your client postgres libraries on your remote machine(s) as
> well?
No, the problem happens with many machines where our Visual Basic
applications is running. After debuging the application we discovered that
Thank you Tom,
> That sounds like your unspecified "remote client" has got some issues,
> but you've not provided any details that would let anyone else figure
> it out.
The referred client is a Windows psql 8.2.4 utility. This client is running
as part of a Windows PostgreSQL 8.2.4 server where w
Hi all,
We are facing some problems after the migration of our PostgreSQL 8.0 to the
8.2.4 version. The entire box runs under SUSE 10.3.
bd_sgp=# select version();
version
--
Hi,
I´ve a PostgreSQL 8.0.13 running in a Windows XP Pro 2002 SP2 box that is
terminating abnormally with signal code 5 every time I make a simple select
in one of our tables.
2007-06-04 21:24:12 LOG: database system was shut down at 2007-06-04
21:23:42 E. South America Standard Time
2007-06-04
standards?
Thanks in advance!
> -Mensagem original-
> De: Stephan Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Enviada em: quarta-feira, 28 de março de 2007 19:23
> Para: Carlos H. Reimer
> Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Assunto: Re: [GENERAL] Order by behaviour
>
>
> On Wed
han Szabo
> Enviada em: quarta-feira, 28 de março de 2007 19:23
> Para: Carlos H. Reimer
> Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Assunto: Re: [GENERAL] Order by behaviour
>
>
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Carlos H. Reimer wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > We have a PostgreSQL 8.0
Hi,
We have a PostgreSQL 8.0.6 cluster configured with lc_collate=pt_BR.UTF-8
and when we run the following SELECT:
SELECT substr(nomerazao,1,4),
ascii(substr(nomerazao,1,1)),
ascii(substr(nomerazao,2,1))
from spunico.unico order by nomerazao;
is returning:
substr | ascii | ascii
+-
Hi,
I would like to improve the response time of the following SQL command but I
need some help to indentify where is it taking most of the processing time.
It seams that it is in the Seq Scan on tt_gra gra, but not sure. Am I right?
Can a new index help in this issue?
Thank you in advance!
e
Hi,
We have very bad performance issues in one of our
customer PostgreSQL servers and we would
like some suggestions to improve the performance for bulky updates.
When one of the biggest tables has all lines
updated for example, it takes at about 30 minutes for processing. If we drop all
da em: terça-feira, 17 de outubro de 2006 00:02
> Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Pgsql-General@Postgresql.Org
> Assunto: Re: RES: RES: RES: [GENERAL] Dates rejected
>
>
> "Carlos H. Reimer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > To discover if it works this way I´ve chan
> Cc: Pgsql-General@Postgresql.Org
> Assunto: Re: RES: RES: RES: [GENERAL] Dates rejected
>
>
> "Carlos H. Reimer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > To discover if it works this way I´ve changed the
> /etc/localtime to relect
> > the following timezone:
&g
outubro de 2006 21:38
> Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Andreas Kretschmer; Pgsql-General@Postgresql.Org
> Assunto: Re: RES: RES: [GENERAL] Dates rejected
>
>
> "Carlos H. Reimer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The problem is related with the to_timestamp func
7
> Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Andreas Kretschmer; Pgsql-General@Postgresql.Org
> Assunto: Re: RES: [GENERAL] Dates rejected
>
>
> "Carlos H. Reimer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > select to_date('16/10/2006','DD/MM/');
> >t
.
Thanks in advance!
Carlos
> -Mensagem original-
> De: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Enviada em: segunda-feira, 16 de outubro de 2006 16:27
> Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Andreas Kretschmer; Pgsql-General@Postgresql.Org
> Assunto: Re: RES: [GENERAL] Dates rej
w can we explain the 01:00:00 hour that the to_date function returns for
date 15/10/2006?
Thank you!
Carlos
> -Mensagem original-
> De: Andreas Kretschmer,,, [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] nome de
> Andreas Kretschmer
> Enviada em: segunda-feira, 16 de outubro de 2006 13:41
&
Hi,
We´ve a simple
insert that is not working. The strange thing is that all kind of date are
working with the exception of 15/10 (DD/MM) dates.
create table tt_teste (datfis timestamp without
time zone not null CHECK (datfis = trunc(datfis::timestamp without time
zone)));
INSERT INTO tt
Hi,
We´re looking for a replication solution that could address the following
situation: every morning our sellers connect to the master server and make a
copy of all tables they will need during the day to their laptop database.
After a day of work, with a lot of work done at their local database
ira, 5 de julho de 2006 00:42
> Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Assunto: Re: [GENERAL] Phantom groups
>
>
> Carlos H. Reimer wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I´m planning to migrate from 7.4 to 8.0.7 and I discovered some strange
> > behavi
Hi,
I´m planning to migrate from 7.4 to 8.0.7 and I discovered some strange
behavior during migration.
pg_dump inserted GRANT to phantom groups. They do not exist in pg_group;
When the script created by pg_dump is processed by psql during restore,
these GRANTs produce a lot of errors.
How could
Hello,
During mass inserts, we have some locking contention in tables referenced by
foreign keys. It´s a 8.0.3 box
and I know that 8.1 solved this but I would like to know if there is an easy
and safe way to only apply this patch to 8.0.3?
Reimer
---(end of broadcast)---
Thanks,
In my first question I would like to use xmin instead of cmin, even so I
could understand the logic.
Then for each XID you have 2 bilions XIDs that are considered lower than and
the other 2 bi higher than.
About row visibility: are all the rows with xmin higher than my XID be
considered
Hi,
I would like to understand better the logic to determine when a xid is older
than another one.
As I could understand, the XID is always incremented, never reset. If it is
true, then we can have rows with cmin ranging
from 1 to 4.294.967.295 (2^32-1).
When xid overflows (32 bits) the next one
28 matches
Mail list logo
