Dear all,
Few days ago I attached a tablespace to one my databases. Say
/hdd-1/database_name is the path for the tablespace. When I attach it
has a free space of 100 GB.
Now my database size grows to 90 GB. I want to prepare for my upcoming
problem of space.
How can I handle this. Would any
Hi,
I log into my database, then i do the following select statement, SELECT *
FROM pg_tables; this lists the
following:
schemaname tablename tableowner tablespace.
pg_catalog | pg_authid | postgres | pg_global
pg_catalog | pg_database | postgres | pg_global
public | jbm_
Ron Johnson wrote:
I know that at one point (v6?) there were hooks in the code for
experimental Berkeley code to do this sort of thing but as far as I know
there has never been anything publicly available.
While tertiary media certainly was relevant 10 years ago, is it
really necessary in 2007
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/14/07 04:06, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
> Where does PostgreSQL stand with storing /really/ large amounts of data
> offline? Specifically, if a FUSE is used to move a tablespace to
> something like a tape archiver can the planner be warned that acc
Gregory Stark wrote:
Thanks. If the tables were in a tablespace that was stored on something that
looked like a conventional filesystem would the server code be prepared to wait
the minutes that it took the operating system and FUSE implementation to load
the tables onto disc?
Ah, I see what y
"Mark Morgan Lloyd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thanks. If the tables were in a tablespace that was stored on something that
> looked like a conventional filesystem would the server code be prepared to
> wait
> the minutes that it took the operating system and FUSE implementation to load
> the
Gregory Stark wrote:
Where does PostgreSQL stand with storing /really/ large amounts of data
offline? Specifically, if a FUSE is used to move a tablespace to something like
a tape archiver can the planner be warned that access might take an extended
period?
No, Postgres can't deal with this. Y
"Mark Morgan Lloyd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Where does PostgreSQL stand with storing /really/ large amounts of data
> offline? Specifically, if a FUSE is used to move a tablespace to something
> like
> a tape archiver can the planner be warned that access might take an extended
> period?
N
Where does PostgreSQL stand with storing /really/ large amounts of data
offline? Specifically, if a FUSE is used to move a tablespace to something
like a tape archiver can the planner be warned that access might take an
extended period?
I know that at one point (v6?) there were hooks in the co
On Monday 04 June 2007 04:53, Richard Huxton wrote:
> John Gardner wrote:
> > I've been testing one of our apps on PostgreSQL for the last few months
> > and I'm about ready to put it on the production server, but I need
> > advice on where to locate the tablespace. I've been so concerned
> > gett
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 09:49:03AM +0100, John Gardner wrote:
> /var/lib/pgsql/data/. Shall I just create a directory under here and
> point the tablespace to there? Any advice would be appreciated.
One of the points of ts is to balance io over different controllers/disks.
Someone should evalula
> I've been testing one of our apps on PostgreSQL for the last few
months
> and I'm about ready to put it on the production server, but I need
> advice on where to locate the tablespace. I've been so concerned
> getting the app working, I haven't even considered this yet.
>
> I'm using a RPM inst
John Gardner wrote:
I've been testing one of our apps on PostgreSQL for the last few months
and I'm about ready to put it on the production server, but I need
advice on where to locate the tablespace. I've been so concerned
getting the app working, I haven't even considered this yet.
I'm using
I've been testing one of our apps on PostgreSQL for the last few months
and I'm about ready to put it on the production server, but I need
advice on where to locate the tablespace. I've been so concerned
getting the app working, I haven't even considered this yet.
I'm using a RPM install of Postg
Hi Magnus,
Magnus Hagander schrieb:
I'm having a hard time trying to create a tablespace with
Windows 2000 and PostgreSQL 8.
In general, it's the service account that has to have permissions. When
you say client/service, do you mean you want to create a tablespace on a
network drive? If so,
> I'm having a hard time trying to create a tablespace with
> Windows 2000 and PostgreSQL 8. Is there a How-To somewhere on
> the Net? I only find tablespace issues with Linux. One
> article even claimed it was impossible with Windows, but
> since I've tried it successfully in a localhost insta
Hi,
I'm having a hard time trying to create a tablespace with Windows 2000
and PostgreSQL 8. Is there a How-To somewhere on the Net? I only find
tablespace issues with Linux. One article even claimed it was impossible
with Windows, but since I've tried it successfully in a localhost
installat
Himanshu Baweja <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> i just have one raid controller with 6 disks
> attached... i see all of it as single drive with three
> partitions create by me...
>
> will creating tablespaces help me also is there a
> way i can say this table to this disk???
In a RAID, all data
i just have one raid controller with 6 disks
attached... i see all of it as single drive with three
partitions create by me...
will creating tablespaces help me also is there a
way i can say this table to this disk???
thx for ur help...
Himanshu
__
Moving table spaces along raids definately helps but will moving tablespaces across partitions help??? in my opinion it should lead to degradation of performance because read/write head will have to move more.
also, i have two raids my data is in first one... and xlog in the other. wi
I was just curious about the following scenario:
- Unix user has their own tablespace (and corresponding database)
stored in /home/someuser/mydata
- Quotas are enabled on /home
- /home runs out of disk space
What happens to the user's tablespace? How does postgres handle this scenario?
-
On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 19:46:41 -0600,
>
> Related question: Once I switch the 8.0.1 system over to be the production,
> can I reverse the direction and restore .dmp files on the 7.4.5 system or
> are the tablespace terms in the dump files going to cause problems?
The 8.0.1 dumps will probably
I'm trying to move over 50 tables (several over 500MB each) from a 7.4.5
database to 8.0.1 on a regular basis during system testing. (The 8.0.1
system will become the production system soon, probably next month.)
I'd like to have the data table and its indexes built in separate tablespaces
on
On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 21:03 -0600, Wes wrote:
> Implicit indexes created by a constraint do not appear to honor the default
> tablespace. The index gets created in the "null" tablespace.
>
> I took pg_dumpall output and modified the schema to place everything in
> specific table spaces. When th
Implicit indexes created by a constraint do not appear to honor the default
tablespace. The index gets created in the "null" tablespace.
I took pg_dumpall output and modified the schema to place everything in
specific table spaces. When the statement:
ALTER TABLE ONLY addresses
ADD CONST
Actually, you *can* write your SQL to be ignorant of schemas (while
still using them because they are good).
In postgres, you specifiy a search path for the user you connect as and
make sure that have the appropriate access rights to objects in other
schemas, and that the other schemas exist in
Andrew Rawnsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Schemas are users in Oracle, but the net effect to the SQL author is
> the same. 'SELECT * FROM SERVICES.USERS' is the same, just that
> 'SERVICES' is a user in oracle (although referred to as a schema, and
> you have to do a 'CREATE SCHEMA AUTHORIZA
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 22 January 2004 19:09
To: Cott Lang; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] tablespaces a priority for 7.5?
> On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 09:05, Brian Maguire wrote:
>
> > In my opinion, it really is a critical feature to support and administer
> > enterprise d
> On Behalf Of Cott Lang
> It seems to me that the lack of point-in-time recovery is a
> much bigger roadblock against big users. :(
Meaning incremental (hot)-backups?
Or as protection against DROP/TRUNCATE/DELETE ALL TABLE/SCHEMA/DATABASE?
With a WAL it should be doable in some 7.x version, al
On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 09:05, Brian Maguire wrote:
> In my opinion, it really is a critical feature to support and administer
> enterprise databases. All the major databases currently support this
> and it is a compelling enough reason drive big users from away from
> using postgres for their ente
> The whole point here is: it is assumed that backup/restore of tablespaces can
> hapen quite quickly and as simple as to copy tablespace files from one
> location to another(even while database is on - WAL can be used to handle
> this) - this is compared to dump.
This
:
Subject: RE: [GENERAL] tablespaces a priority for 7.5?
In RAID era tablespaces are not such important regarding performance.
But for backup/restore - the ability to backup/restore selected tablespaces
while leaving other tablespaces is a big thing
Is support for tablespaces a priority feature for 7.5? I believe there
has been significant development in this area and it seems that
postgres' file structure opens it up nicely to support it. What are the
chances this will be completed?
In my opinion, it really is a critical feature to suppor
Quoting Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> "Keith C. Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Ok, thats for the response. I take it a PG namespace = Oracle table space
> (or
> > namespace is simply the generic term).
>
> Actually if you check back you'll notice you're the first person to say
>
"Keith C. Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ok, thats for the response. I take it a PG namespace = Oracle table space (or
> namespace is simply the generic term).
Actually if you check back you'll notice you're the first person to say
"namespace". The original question was about "tablespace
Quoting Mike Nolan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Ok, thats for the response. I take it a PG namespace = Oracle table space
> (or
> > namespace is simply the generic term). I can see some definite benefits
> > especially with disk i/o throughput though I thought database partitioning
> (I
> > think th
> Ok, thats for the response. I take it a PG namespace = Oracle table space (or
> namespace is simply the generic term). I can see some definite benefits
> especially with disk i/o throughput though I thought database partitioning (I
> think that is what its called) would provide the same thing.
Message-
> From: John Sidney-Woollett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sat 12/13/2003 4:38 AM
> To: Keith C. Perry
> Cc: Bruce Momjian; Brian Maguire; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] tablespaces in 7.5?
>
>
>
>
I am curious if tablespaces are going to be seriously targeted for the next version.
It really opens up new levels of scalability and is a killer feature from an
administration perspective.
Thanks,
Brian
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: the
39 matches
Mail list logo
