I am trying to build Postgresql 9.2
./configure --prefix=/usr/pgsql-9.2 --with-ossp-uuid --with-libxml
Got the error at config.log:
configure:9747: result: no
configure:9752: checking for uuid_export in -luuid
configure:9787: gcc -o conftest -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes
-Wpointer-arit
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 10:18:50AM -0500, AI Rumman wrote:
> I am trying to build Postgresql 9.2
>
> ./configure --prefix=/usr/pgsql-9.2 --with-ossp-uuid --with-libxml
>
> Got the error at config.log:
>
> configure:9747: result: no
> configure:9752: checking for uuid_export in -luuid
>
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:36:11AM -0500, AI Rumman wrote:
> Its already installed.
> I am runninf Postgresql 9.0 with uuid successfully in this server.
Most likely you installed just part of the library. Not sure what
OS/distribution you're using, but on debian, for example - there is
distinction
Hey guys,
I'm not sure the last time I saw this discussion, but I was somewhat curious:
what would be your ideal Linux distribution for a nice solid PostgreSQL
installation? We've kinda bounced back and forth between RHEL, CentOS, and
Ubuntu LTS, so I was wondering what everyone else thought.
Hi,
When I was upgrading database from 9.0 to 9.2 using pg_upgrade, I got the
error:
CREATE VIEW stats_slowest_queries AS
SELECT pg_stat_activity.procpid, (('now'::text)::timestamp(6) with time
zone - pg_stat_activity.query_start) AS execution_time,
pg_stat_activity.current_query FROM pg_stat
On Sun, 2013-01-13 at 01:49 -0200, Edson Richter wrote:
> Don't know if pgAdmin maintainer keep an eye in this list, but here I go:
>
> - Using pgAdmin 1.16.1 in Windows 7 x64 downloaded today
>
> 1) You alter a role, adding any information you want: when the
> properties page is open, pgAdmin a
On Jan 13, 2013, at 1:36 PM, AI Rumman wrote:
> CREATE VIEW stats_slowest_queries AS
>SELECT pg_stat_activity.procpid, (('now'::text)::timestamp(6) with time
> zone - pg_stat_activity.query_start) AS execution_time,
> pg_stat_activity.current_query FROM pg_stat_activity WHERE
> (pg_stat_acti
Built & installed 9.2.3. Dumped 9.1 db (using 9.2 pg_dump IIRC). Restored.
Database search path was not restored. Had to execute alter database ... set
search_path to...
Dump commands:
pg_dumpall -g -f roles.dump
pg_dump -F c -Z 0 -v pedcard > db.dump
Restore commands:
psql -f roles.dump post
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 02:17:34PM -0500, Vibhor Kumar wrote:
>
> On Jan 13, 2013, at 1:36 PM, AI Rumman wrote:
>
> > CREATE VIEW stats_slowest_queries AS
> >SELECT pg_stat_activity.procpid, (('now'::text)::timestamp(6) with time
> > zone - pg_stat_activity.query_start) AS execution_time,
>
Scott Ribe writes:
> Built & installed 9.2.3. Dumped 9.1 db (using 9.2 pg_dump IIRC). Restored.
> Database search path was not restored. Had to execute alter database ... set
> search_path to...
That's a hole in the particular dump methodology you selected:
> pg_dumpall -g -f roles.dump
> pg_du
On Jan 13, 2013, at 2:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> That's a hole in the particular dump methodology you selected:
>
>> pg_dumpall -g -f roles.dump
>> pg_dump -F c -Z 0 -v pedcard > db.dump
>
> pg_dump does not dump/restore database properties, only database
> contents. Properties are the responsibi
Is the order in which the expressions in a VALUES() clause defined?
I'm doing this: INSERT INTO foo (a, b) VALUES (nextval('bar'), currval('bar'))
It works fine, but I'm wondering whether it's guaranteed to work or whether I'm
relying on an artifact of the implementation.
Cheers,
Steve
--
Steve Atkins writes:
> Is the order in which the expressions in a VALUES() clause defined?
> I'm doing this: INSERT INTO foo (a, b) VALUES (nextval('bar'), currval('bar'))
> It works fine, but I'm wondering whether it's guaranteed to work or whether
> I'm relying on an artifact of the implementa
On 14/01/13 07:27, Shaun Thomas wrote:
Hey guys,
I'm not sure the last time I saw this discussion, but I was somewhat curious:
what would be your ideal Linux distribution for a nice solid PostgreSQL
installation? We've kinda bounced back and forth between RHEL, CentOS, and
Ubuntu LTS, so I wa
I use Ubuntu for development and production, it is rock solid.
Thanks,
Sunday Olutayo
- Original Message -
From: "Gavin Flower"
To: "Shaun Thomas"
Cc: "pgsql-general@postgresql.org"
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2013 11:44:42 PM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Linux Distribution Prefere
On 01/13/2013 03:44 PM, Gavin Flower wrote:
I would tend use Fedora for development, but would consider CentOS (or
RHEL, if we had the budget) for production - I avoid Ubuntu like the plague.
I happen to be doing my own research on this matter. I tend to lean
more toward RHEL or CentOS for pr
On Jan 13, 2013, at 2:36 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Steve Atkins writes:
>> Is the order in which the expressions in a VALUES() clause defined?
>> I'm doing this: INSERT INTO foo (a, b) VALUES (nextval('bar'),
>> currval('bar'))
>
>> It works fine, but I'm wondering whether it's guaranteed to work
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Chris Ernst wrote:
> I've seen the opinion of "avoid Ubuntu like the plague" expressed many
> times, but it is never followed up with any solid reasoning. Can you (or
> anyone else) give specific details on exactly why you believe Ubuntu should
> be avoided?
I s
On Jan 13, 2013, at 10:27 AM, Shaun Thomas wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I'm not sure the last time I saw this discussion, but I was somewhat curious:
> what would be your ideal Linux distribution for a nice solid PostgreSQL
> installation? We've kinda bounced back and forth between RHEL, CentOS, an
On 14/01/13 13:07, Chris Ernst wrote:
On 01/13/2013 03:44 PM, Gavin Flower wrote:
I would tend use Fedora for development, but would consider CentOS (or
RHEL, if we had the budget) for production - I avoid Ubuntu like the
plague.
I happen to be doing my own research on this matter. I tend to
Ubuntu did the marketing for linux and many more. Some people are just haters.
Can you tell us about upstart?
Sent from my LG Mobile
Gavin Flower wrote:
On 14/01/13 13:07, Chris Ernst wrote:
> On 01/13/2013 03:44 PM, Gavin Flower wrote:
>> I would tend use Fedora for development, but would co
Please don't top post, add your comments at the end as per the norm for
this group.
On 14/01/13 12:06, SUNDAY A. OLUTAYO wrote:
Ubuntu did the marketing for linux and many more. Some people are just haters.
Can you tell us about upstart?
Sent from my LG Mobile
Gavin Flower wrote:
On 14/01/
On 01/13/2013 04:07 PM, Chris Ernst wrote:
On 01/13/2013 03:44 PM, Gavin Flower wrote:
I've seen the opinion of "avoid Ubuntu like the plague" expressed many
times, but it is never followed up with any solid reasoning. Can you
(or anyone else) give specific details on exactly why you believe Ub
I need to INSERT a large number of records. For performance reasons,
I'd rather send them to Postgres in one giant INSERT.
However, if there's a problem in one record (eg one row doesn't meet a
constraint), I'd still like the others saved. That is, I specifically
DO NOT want atomic behavior. It
Greetings,
I'm running postgres-9.2.2 in a Linux-x86_64 cluster with 1 master and
several hot standby servers. Since upgrading to 9.2.2 from 9.1.x a
few months ago, I switched from generating a base backup on the
master, to generating it on a dedicated slave/standby (to reduce the
load on the mast
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Robert James wrote:
> I have a lot of VALUES I want to INSERT. But only a subset of them -
> only those that meet a JOIN criteria involving another table.
>
> I could INSERT them into a temp table, and then do a SELECT INTO. But
> do I need to do that? Is there
2013/1/14 Robert James :
> I have a lot of VALUES I want to INSERT. But only a subset of them -
> only those that meet a JOIN criteria involving another table.
>
> I could INSERT them into a temp table, and then do a SELECT INTO. But
> do I need to do that? Is there any way to do a INSERT... VAL
Em 13/01/2013 16:27, Shaun Thomas escreveu:
Hey guys,
I'm not sure the last time I saw this discussion, but I was somewhat curious:
what would be your ideal Linux distribution for a nice solid PostgreSQL
installation? We've kinda bounced back and forth between RHEL, CentOS, and
Ubuntu LTS, so
I'm not sure the last time I saw this discussion, but I was somewhat
curious: what would be your ideal Linux distribution for a nice solid
PostgreSQL installation? We've kinda bounced back and forth between
RHEL, CentOS, and Ubuntu LTS, so I was wondering what everyone else
thought.
We run
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 4:06 PM, SUNDAY A. OLUTAYO wrote:
> 4 reasons:
>
> 1. One place where I worked Ubuntu was standard, I tried it and found
> that it lacked at least a couple of desktop features in GNOME 2 that
> I found very useful into Fedora. Fortunately, I was allowed to
> re
Em 14/01/2013 01:46, Scott Marlowe escreveu:
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 4:06 PM, SUNDAY A. OLUTAYO wrote:
4 reasons:
1. One place where I worked Ubuntu was standard, I tried it and found
that it lacked at least a couple of desktop features in GNOME 2 that
I found very useful into Fedo
On 14/01/13 16:46, Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 4:06 PM, SUNDAY A. OLUTAYO wrote:
4 reasons:
1. One place where I worked Ubuntu was standard, I tried it and found
that it lacked at least a couple of desktop features in GNOME 2 that
I found very useful into Fedora. F
On 1/13/13, Ian Lawrence Barwick wrote:
> 2013/1/14 Robert James :
>> I have a lot of VALUES I want to INSERT. But only a subset of them -
>> only those that meet a JOIN criteria involving another table.
>>
>> I could INSERT them into a temp table, and then do a SELECT INTO. But
>> do I need to
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Robert James wrote:
> Thanks. But how do I do that where I have many literals? Something like:
>
> INSERT INTO seltest (id, a, b) SELECT (1,2,3),(4,5,6),(7,8,9) WHERE b
> IN (SELECT ...)
You can use WITH clauses in crazy ways with PostgreSQL. I haven't
actually t
Hi,
I am having an issue upgrading a really old 8.2 db up to 9.2.2. One of the
tables contains a bytea field. When I backup & restore using pgadmin from
my 9.2.2 install, it doesn't convert this field correctly.
The original 8.2 database was created like:
CREATE DATABASE test... ENCODING = 'SQL
On 2013.01.13 5:58 PM, Robert James wrote:
I need to INSERT a large number of records. For performance reasons,
I'd rather send them to Postgres in one giant INSERT.
However, if there's a problem in one record (eg one row doesn't meet a
constraint), I'd still like the others saved. That is, I
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> Most importantly, if you've got LOTS of talent for one distro or
> another, you're probably best off exploiting it. If 95% of all the
> developers and ops crew run Ubuntu or Debian, stick to one of them.
> If they favor Fedora / RHEL stick t
On 2013-01-14 00:44, Gavin Flower wrote:
On 14/01/13 07:27, Shaun Thomas wrote:
Hey guys,
I'm not sure the last time I saw this discussion, but I was somewhat
curious: what would be your ideal Linux distribution for a nice solid
PostgreSQL installation? We've kinda bounced back and forth bet
38 matches
Mail list logo
