I am not sure how big your table is one way we implemented here was we selected
the clean rows and outputted it to a csv file. And the rows affected we had to
load from the backup, luckily we had the clean backup.
Ex: assume you have 1,2,3,4,5100 rows and the corrupted is between 60-70. I
o
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Toby Corkindale
wrote:
> Many thanks for clearing that up! I hadn't realised that you could only
> change one of the two options on the fly.
The streaming rep options require a restart also...
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
Post
On 1 Srpen 2011, 8:27, Deniz Atak wrote:
> Deepak, Tom thanks for answering.
>
> Tom, we have psql 8.1.18. So you are right, this weird message is because
> of
> the old version. I will check with my colleague about the possible
> reasons.
> What can I do if there is a messed up table?
First of al
Hi Thomas,
thanks for your answer. We decided not to go further with this error,
because soon we will have another product that replaces this one. Because I
want to learn more about this topic, I did the following:
Before I write your code, I tried:
select oid,ctid,relname from pg_class where cti
Hi Deepak,
thanks for your answer. Do you have any opinion about how can I find the
corrupted rows? Do you know how to read:
"could not read block 4707 of relation 1663/16384/16564"
?
Also, there is one interesting thing: a very similar query like this:
select src_ip,round(sum(size)/175) from t
postgresql.x86_64 8.3.14-1PGDG.rhel5
postgresql-server.x86_64 8.3.14-1PGDG.rhel5
ERROR: operator does not exist: integer = integer
LINE 3:inner join vendedor as v on a.vendedor_id = v.id
On 1 Srpen 2011, 13:55, Deniz Atak wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> thanks for your answer. We decided not to go further with this error,
> because soon we will have another product that replaces this one. Because
> I
> want to learn more about this topic, I did the following:
>
> Before I write your code,
2011/8/1 Clodoaldo Neto
> postgresql.x86_64 8.3.14-1PGDG.rhel5
> postgresql-server.x86_64 8.3.14-1PGDG.rhel5
>
> ERROR: operator does not exist: integer = integer
> LINE 3:inner join vendedor as v on a.vendedor_id = v.id
>
Clodoaldo Neto writes:
> postgresql.x86_64 8.3.14-1PGDG.rhel5
> postgresql-server.x86_64 8.3.14-1PGDG.rhel5
> ERROR: operator does not exist: integer = integer
> Any ideas?
Something nasty happened to the pg_operator catalog?
On 1 Srpen 2011, 10:25, Deniz Atak wrote:
> Hi Deepak,
>
> thanks for your answer. Do you have any opinion about how can I find the
> corrupted rows? Do you know how to read:
>
> "could not read block 4707 of relation 1663/16384/16564"
>
> ?
> Also, there is one interesting thing: a very similar qu
Deniz Atak writes:
> thanks for your answer. Do you have any opinion about how can I find the
> corrupted rows? Do you know how to read:
> "could not read block 4707 of relation 1663/16384/16564"
You should read the chapter about Database Physical Storage in the
manual to find out how to interpr
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Clodoaldo Neto
wrote:
> Restarting the server fixes the error.
There are few things that get "fixed" in PostgreSQL by restarting the
server. That is not a recommended action to take to solve problems
with this software.
--
Simon Riggs http://w
Hi Forum,
We are planning to upgrade a postgres 8.0 database to postgres 9.0 (Actually
already done in Dev). The application is J2EE application with Hibernate. My
question are
1) Is there a list of things that needs to be taken care while
upgrading(known issues).
2) Do I need to up
On 01/08/2011 06:35, kalyan kumar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am using Postgre SQL 8.3, where I want to backup my entire database.
> For the same I am using pg_dump.exe. I am able to take the backup of my
> database in to my local machine. If I want to take the backup into
> network folder, how to pass "-f
Hi,
I'ver been wondering how to set the number of rows that are scanned by
analyze. (I want to increase it)
I couln't find it at first but when i read closer i found that is does:
"The largest statistics target among the columns being analyzed
determines the number of table rows sampled to prepare
On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 04:42:23PM +0200, Willy-Bas Loos wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'ver been wondering how to set the number of rows that are scanned by
> analyze. (I want to increase it)
> I couln't find it at first but when i read closer i found that is does:
> "The largest statistics target among the c
Willy-Bas Loos writes:
> "The largest statistics target among the columns being analyzed
> determines the number of table rows sampled to prepare the
> statistics."
> (http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/interactive/sql-analyze.html)
> My question is *HOW* does it "detirmine the number of table ro
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Toby Corkindale
wrote:
> On 28/07/11 03:47, Jaime Casanova wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Toby Corkindale
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> So that looks good, but then I try this on the slave:
>>> # repmgr -f /etc/repmgr/validator/repmgr.conf \
>>> --verbose sta
I have an executable which uses ecpg which was created on a system using
postgres version 8.2.6. I sent it to a site with version 8.4.7
installed. The executable fails with a memory fault.
Is there a problem doing this?
Paul Tilles
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postg
Hi Forum,
We are planning to upgrade a postgres 8.0 database to postgres 9.0 (Actually
already done in Dev). The application is J2EE application with Hibernate. My
question are
1) Is there a list of things that needs to be taken care while
upgrading(known issues).
2) Do I need to u
Ok, so 300 times the statistics target!
Thanks a lot for the exact code and formula!
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Why? This is purely an implementation detail. From the user's
> viewpoint, either the stats are good enough or they're not --- the exact
> number of rows sample
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Atul Goel wrote:
> Hi Forum,
>
> We are planning to upgrade a postgres 8.0 database to postgres 9.0 (Actually
> already done in Dev).
consider that 9.0 is not the next version after 8.0, there were 4 more
(8.1, 8.2, 8.3 and 8.4) and at least for changing from 8.2 t
Hey .Org,
The PgWest CFP has been extended until the 12th. Let's get those talks in!
https://www.postgresqlconference.org/talk_types
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
The PostgreSQL Conference - http://
I am planning on bringing our 8.3 installation up to 9.0.4. First I upgraded
the jdbc driver on our staging environment, after 1 month on staging, we
tested with the 9.0 driver on production. The actual database upgrade will
be more complicated, and we are going to simulate an upgrade on a
non-prod
Problem:
A client of mine, running PostgreSQL 8.3, wrote his application such
that it depends on column order. (He now realizes that this was a
really bad idea.) Among the things I'm doing for him is helping with
upgrades and downgrades. So I wrote a little upgrade script that
changes a t
Hello, I need to write a function that sometimes return a row with only a
column and sometimes return a row with two columns.
Is it possible to do something like this with record type?
If it's not what's the best alternative to achieve such a result?
Thanks in advance for your help.
Gianpier
>
> Is it possible to do something like this with record type?
>
>
Yes.
The docs, while possibly somewhat confusing, cover this need. If you have a
more specific question (and possibly provide more details as to why you have
this need) you will be more likely to get a detailed answer.
Davi
Atul,
> 2) Do I need to upgrade JDBC driver when I upgrade to postgres9.0.
Yes, at least if you use BLOB types. The 9.0 server sends them in a
format former JDBC drivers cannot understand:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/runtime-config-client.html#GUC-BYTEA-OUTPUT
Other than that
"Reuven M. Lerner" writes:
> Outside of a transaction, this function works just great. But inside of
> a transaction, we get the following error message:
> Error 55006: Cannot ALTER TABLE "RecipeNumericParameterSnapshot" because
> it has pending trigger events.
> Now, I've never seen this bef
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Gianpiero Venditti wrote:
> Hello, I need to write a function that sometimes return a row with only a
> column and sometimes return a row with two columns.
>
> Is it possible to do something like this with record type?
>
> If it's not what's the best alternative to
Hi folks,
I have a problem with identical versions of postgresql - 8.3.13
Config files are identical. HostA is a 32 bit CentOS 5.3 install and the
hostB is x86_64 CentOS 6.
Difference in architecture should not be a problem - I have another 64
bit CentOS where both queries are executed displ
Hi folks,
I have a problem with identical versions of postgresql - 8.3.13
Config files are identical. HostA is a 32 bit CentOS 5.3 install and the
hostB is x86_64 CentOS 6.
Difference in architecture should not be a problem - I have another 64
bit CentOS where both queries are executed displ
On 08/01/11 11:12 AM, Johnny Edge wrote:
I have a problem with identical versions of postgresql - 8.3.13
Config files are identical. HostA is a 32 bit CentOS 5.3 install and
the hostB is x86_64 CentOS 6.
Difference in architecture should not be a problem - I have another 64
bit CentOS where bot
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Johnny Edge wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I have a problem with identical versions of postgresql - 8.3.13
>
> Config files are identical. HostA is a 32 bit CentOS 5.3 install and
> the hostB is x86_64 CentOS 6.
>
> Difference in architecture should not be a problem - I hav
Hi folks,
I have a problem with identical versions of postgresql - 8.3.13
Config files are identical. HostA is a 32 bit CentOS 5.3 install and the
hostB is x86_64 CentOS 6.
Difference in architecture should not be a problem - I have another 64
bit CentOS where both queries are executed displ
Hi, everyone. Tom wrote:
Exactly what it says: not-yet-processed trigger events for the table.
If you don't have any explicit triggers on the table, maybe they are
FOREIGN KEY implementation triggers. It's hard to say more than that
when you haven't shown us any of the DDL.
Sorry; I'm enc
"Reuven M. Lerner" writes:
> Hi, everyone. Tom wrote:
>> Exactly what it says: not-yet-processed trigger events for the table.
>> If you don't have any explicit triggers on the table, maybe they are
>> FOREIGN KEY implementation triggers. It's hard to say more than that
>> when you haven't sho
On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 10:53:16PM +0300, Johnny Edge wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I have a problem with identical versions of postgresql - 8.3.13
>
> Config files are identical. HostA is a 32 bit CentOS 5.3 install and the
> hostB is x86_64 CentOS 6.
>
> Difference in architecture should not be a
Is it possible instead of executing following two statements:
SHOW search_path; SELECT version();
to execute just one statement returning both search_path and version?
I'm using Postgres 9.0 and need the result either as two tuples or two
fields...
Could you suggest how to rewrite the two state
This message has been digitally signed by the sender.
Re___GENERAL__string_comparison_problem.eml
Description: Binary data
-
Hi-Tech Gears Ltd, Gurgaon, India
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscrip
On 08/01/2011 02:07 PM, Konstantin Izmailov wrote:
Is it possible instead of executing following two statements:
SHOW search_path; SELECT version();
to execute just one statement returning both search_path and version?
I'm using Postgres 9.0 and need the result either as two tuples or two
fie
Hi again. Tom wrote:
Um ... I don't see anything about RecipeNumericParameterSnapshot here.
Grr... I meant to put:
Reports=# \d "RecipeNumericParameterSnapshot"
Table "public.RecipeNumericParameterSnapshot"
Column | Type | Modifiers
--
Konstantin Izmailov writes:
> Is it possible instead of executing following two statements:
> ? SHOW search_path; SELECT version();
> to execute just one statement returning both search_path and version?
>
> I'm using Postgres 9.0 and need the result either as two tuples or two
> fields...
>
> C
select current_setting('search_path') union select version();
Regards
Rodrigo
On 08/01/2011 06:07 PM, Konstantin Izmailov wrote:
Is it possible instead of executing following two statements:
SHOW search_path; SELECT version();
to execute just one statement returning both search_path and vers
"Reuven M. Lerner" writes:
> Reports=# \d "RecipeNumericParameterSnapshot"
> Foreign-key constraints:
> "RecipeNumericParameterSnapshot_RecipeSnapshot_fk" FOREIGN KEY
> ("RecipeSnapshotID") REFERENCES "RecipeSnapshot"("ID") ON DELETE CASCADE
> DEFERRABLE INITIALLY DEFERRED
OK, this is abou
Thanks for the great explanation! Now it's time to do some detective
work...
Reuven
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
On 1/08/2011 11:07 PM, Atul Goel wrote:
Hi Forum,
We are planning to upgrade a postgres 8.0 database to postgres 9.0
(Actually already done in Dev). The application is J2EE application with
Hibernate. My question are
1)Is there a list of things that needs to be taken care while
upgrading(known
On 1/08/2011 1:35 PM, kalyan kumar wrote:
Hi,
I am using Postgre SQL 8.3, where I want to backup my entire database.
For the same I am using pg_dump.exe. I am able to take the backup of my
database in to my local machine. If I want to take the backup into
network folder, how to pass "-f" paramet
On 1/08/2011 10:11 PM, Paul Tilles wrote:
I have an executable which uses ecpg which was created on a system using
postgres version 8.2.6. I sent it to a site with version 8.4.7
installed. The executable fails with a memory fault.
Is there a problem doing this?
With the amount of information y
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Atul Goel wrote:
> Hi Forum,
>
> We are planning to upgrade a postgres 8.0 database to postgres 9.0 (Actually
> already done in Dev). The application is J2EE application with Hibernate. My
> question are
>
> 1) Is there a list of things that needs to be taken c
On 02/08/11 01:05, Jaime Casanova wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Toby Corkindale
wrote:
On 28/07/11 03:47, Jaime Casanova wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Toby Corkindale
wrote:
So that looks good, but then I try this on the slave:
# repmgr -f /etc/repmgr/validator/repm
> For that matter - is there a reason it has to be an integer? Allowing
> hostnames there would be more friendly. Using integers means someone has to
> maintain a mapping on node IDs to hostnames in a separate place, and then
> that leads to mistakes, like someone thinking the standby node (2) i
52 matches
Mail list logo
