Greetings,
* Poul Kristensen (bcc5...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Are all files inclusive wal files added a checksum?
WAL files include checksums, yes. The heap files in recent versions can
also include checksums, but they don't by defualt. Currently, checksums
can only be enabled at initdb-time, meani
Thanks Richard !
I realized that, I was restoring on an 32 bit server.
Regards,
Venkat
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Richard Huxton wrote:
> On 23/09/11 13:53, Venkat Balaji wrote:
>
>> Linux *prod-server* 2.6.18-194.17.1.el5 #1 SMP Mon Sep 20 07:12:06 EDT
>> 2010 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/L
On 23/09/11 13:53, Venkat Balaji wrote:
Linux *prod-server* 2.6.18-194.17.1.el5 #1 SMP Mon Sep 20 07:12:06 EDT
2010 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
The server version where I restored the production backup is as follows -
Linux *backup-server* 2.6.18-194.3.1.el5PAE #1 SMP Sun May 2 04:42:25
EDT 2
Apologies -
I did not mention complete details of PG and OS -
Postgres 9.0.1
Production Operating System version where Postgres is running is as follows
-
Linux *prod-server* 2.6.18-194.17.1.el5 #1 SMP Mon Sep 20 07:12:06 EDT 2010
x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
The server version where I restore
Antoine PERENNEC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Actually, I've retrieved a postgreSQL database from a postgreSQL
> server that was running on windows and I'm trying to load this
> database on a postgreSQL server that will be running on a linux
> mandrake platform.
You generally can't transfer the p
Hi,
not sure I quite understand, but could you not just concatenate all the fields and
test on that? like:
select test1, test2, test3 from testtable
where test1 || test2 || test3 = 'whateveryouwanttotest'
you might have to do some typecasting/conversion on data types other than strings...
r
Marco Colombo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not against abusing of the db, nor playing dirty tricks, if that fits
> your needs. You're free to design your db the way you like and face
> the cost of a careful design or of later SQL gymnastics. I'm fine,
> as long as you don't ask for syntactic
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Greg Stark wrote:
Marco Colombo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
(a = b or (a is null and b is null))
that raises a flag for me. It seems that NULL is used as a special value,
which is not.
Well, as I said, it raised a flag for me too. However, it's not good to be too
dogmatic about
Marco Colombo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> (a = b or (a is null and b is null))
>
> that raises a flag for me. It seems that NULL is used as a special value,
> which is not.
Well, as I said, it raised a flag for me too. However, it's not good to be too
dogmatic about things. General rules are
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, David Helgason wrote:
On 27. sep 2004, at 22:08, Dean Gibson (DB Administrator) wrote:
Greg Stark wrote on 2004-09-27 08:17:
Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 20:16:52 +0200, David Helgason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>>> On a similar note, I've f
On 27. sep 2004, at 22:08, Dean Gibson (DB Administrator) wrote:
Greg Stark wrote on 2004-09-27 08:17:
Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 20:16:52 +0200, David Helgason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>>> On a similar note, I've found myself wanting an extended '='
operat
Even simpler: COALESCE( a = b, a IS NULL AND b IS NULL )
-- Dean
Greg Stark wrote on 2004-09-27 08:17:
Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 20:16:52 +0200, David Helgason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > On a similar note, I've found myself wanting an extended '=' op
12 matches
Mail list logo
