Hi Adrian,
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Adrian Klaver
wrote:
> FYI, 9.3 is now up to 9.3.17:
> At some point, once you have gotten a handle on using Postgres, you should
> probably update. Read the Release Notes for each of the minor releases to
> see what has been fixed.
Ah, good to know! T
On 05/19/2017 01:57 PM, Micky Hulse wrote:
Wow, so many helpful replies already! Thanks everyone! I'm going to do
my best at answering questions … Starting from the first email reply.
:)
What version of Postgres, OS and how was it installed?
PostgreSQL 9.3.9 on i686-redhat-linux-gnu, compil
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Paul Jungwirth wrote:
> On 05/19/2017 02:25 PM, Micky Hulse wrote:
>
>> Awesome, that worked!
>>
>> SET search_path TO myschema, public;
>>
>> Thanks to everyone for the help! I really appreciate it. :)
>>
>
> Glad you figured it out! Setting the seach_path is
On 05/19/2017 02:25 PM, Micky Hulse wrote:
Awesome, that worked!
SET search_path TO myschema, public;
Thanks to everyone for the help! I really appreciate it. :)
Glad you figured it out! Setting the seach_path is often a good thing to
put in your ~/.psqlrc so you don't run into the same
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Micky Hulse wrote:
>> If you find that the type isn't in the public schema, try setting your
>> schema search path so that the function can locate it, e.g.:
>> SET search_path TO foo, public;
Awesome, that worked!
SET search_path TO myschema, public;
Thanks
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Micky Hulse wrote:
> Cool! Dumb question, but is foo the schema or the type?
Doh! I see now that foo is the schema! Thanks again Paul!
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgre
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 1:31 PM, David G. Johnston
wrote:
> Short answer here is that whomever is calling that function needs to ensure
> that their search_path is setup so that the type can be found somewhere in
> it. Your desire for obscurity means you are pretty much on the hook for
> figuring
Hello and thanks for the help!
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Paul Jungwirth
wrote:
> It sounds like the type might be in a different schema. You can say \dn to
> see the schemas in your database, and \dT+ will show the types along with
> their schema. You could also do \dT+ foo.* to see all th
Wow, so many helpful replies already! Thanks everyone! I'm going to do
my best at answering questions … Starting from the first email reply.
:)
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Adrian Klaver
wrote:
>> sudo -i -u username
> You should not need to do above.
>> psql -U otherusername -d database
> Ju
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 1:06 PM, Micky Hulse wrote:
Short answer here is that whomever is calling that function needs to
ensure that their search_path is setup so that the type can be found
somewhere in it. Your desire for obscurity means you are pretty much on
the hook for figuring out the rig
On 05/19/2017 01:06 PM, Micky Hulse wrote:
ERROR: type "xxx_xxx_x" does not exist
LINE 1: DECLARE results xxx_xxx_x;
It sounds like the type might be in a different schema. You can say \dn
to see the schemas in your database, and \dT+ will show the types along
with their schema. You
On 05/19/2017 01:06 PM, Micky Hulse wrote:
Hello,
I hope this is the right list for me to ask questions about psql.
Please let me know if I am in the wrong place. :)
I am far from an advanced user of PostgreSQL, so please bear with me ...
I am working with an inherited database/codebase. I am
Hello,
I hope this is the right list for me to ask questions about psql.
Please let me know if I am in the wrong place. :)
I am far from an advanced user of PostgreSQL, so please bear with me ...
I am working with an inherited database/codebase. I am trying to call
this function via psql:
# SEL
13 matches
Mail list logo
