Hello,
>
>
>
>
> 2013/5/21 Adarsh Sharma
>
>> Try to take backups of that table & index only. If succeeded drop and
>> recreate them. May be it fix your issue.
>>
>
> On Monday night I made the slave server. Yesterday I was analyzing the log
> files and I found the following messages.
>
> 2013-05-
On 05/23/2013 09:57 PM, Mike Christensen wrote:
I don't know about name-recognition in El Salvador but Etsy,
Wisconsin Courts, Skype, Affilias, FlightAware, NTT are quite
recognizable here.
Don't forget Instagram. :)
We're not quite that size, but our financial PG system peaks at
Thank you all of you for your answers! It helps me a lot because when I'm
trying to convince a client to migrate to PostgreSQL sometimes they think that
because it's free, it only works for small databases for web or desktop
applications with a few users, while they blindly trust in oracle or sq
Oscar Calderon wrote:
> I think that in my country is more common to hear success stories like that
> about other databases like Oracle because is more expanded here, but i
> would like if there's a place or if you can share with me some real
> experiences or success stories that you ever heard of
i use postgresql-9.2.4 install on ubuntu11.04(natty)
and i use the command:
*postgres@ubuntu:/$ postgres -D /usr/local/pgsql/data*
or use
*postgres@ubuntu:/$ /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postmaster -D
/usr/local/pgsql/data*
to start the server
but it's stopping at the message:
*LOG: database system
2013/5/24 YuChi :
> i use postgresql-9.2.4 install on ubuntu11.04(natty)
> and i use the command:
>
> *postgres@ubuntu:/$ postgres -D /usr/local/pgsql/data*
>
> or use
>
> *postgres@ubuntu:/$ /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postmaster -D
> /usr/local/pgsql/data*
>
> to start the server
> but it's stopping at
On 05/24/2013 12:35 AM, YuChi wrote:
i use postgresql-9.2.4 install on ubuntu11.04(natty)
and i use the command:
*postgres@ubuntu:/$ postgres -D /usr/local/pgsql/data*
or use
*postgres@ubuntu:/$ /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postmaster -D
/usr/local/pgsql/data*
to start the server
but it's stopping at
On 24/05/2013 08:35, YuChi wrote:
> i use postgresql-9.2.4 install on ubuntu11.04(natty)
> and i use the command:
>
> *postgres@ubuntu:/$ postgres -D /usr/local/pgsql/data*
>
> or use
>
> *postgres@ubuntu:/$ /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postmaster -D
> /usr/local/pgsql/data*
>
> to start the server
>
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:52 PM, wrote:
> Thank you all of you for your answers! It helps me a lot because when I'm
> trying to convince a client to migrate to PostgreSQL sometimes they think
> that because it's free, it only works for small databases for web or desktop
> applications with a
Also it's worth noting that there are no reporting / licensing
requirements for postgresql. It's all over the place, and you just
don't see it. My last company we had a 400G user database serving some
2million students daily, and were seriously pounding a pair of $25k db
servers to handle the load.
Yes, i'm agree with you. What i tried to say was that, here in my country,
Oracle support is very extended in the largest companies of the country,
and those companies trusts that Oracle is a highly scalable and robust
database, what is absolutely true, but they think that PostgreSQL is
something l
In addition to the other places mentioned, don't forget that the .info
and .org TLDs run on pgsql. and run quite well too. Oracle tossed a
LOT of FUD when Afilias put in their bid to run the TLD on postgresql.
It was actually quite pathetic. Here's the comments from Oracle:
http://forum.icann.org/
The Greater London Authority is also ditching Oracle in favour of PG. I
consulted them while they kick started their transition and the first new
PG/PostGIS only project is already delivered. The number of companies
ditching Oracle is probably much larger than it seems, giving the dynamics
in salar
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Bèrto ëd Sèra wrote:
> The Greater London Authority is also ditching Oracle in favour of PG. I
> consulted them while they kick started their transition and the first new
> PG/PostGIS only project is already delivered. The number of companies
> ditching Oracle is p
2013/5/25 Scott Marlowe :
> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Bèrto ëd Sèra wrote:
>> The Greater London Authority is also ditching Oracle in favour of PG. I
>> consulted them while they kick started their transition and the first new
>> PG/PostGIS only project is already delivered. The number of c
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 12:56 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> In addition to the other places mentioned, don't forget that the .info
> and .org TLDs run on pgsql. and run quite well too. Oracle tossed a
> LOT of FUD when Afilias put in their bid to run the TLD on postgresql.
> It was actually quite pat
>
>
> "Ms. Gelhausen is quite correct that these are important
> capabilities, finally available with the release of Oracle9i. We
> applaud Oracle's continued efforts to close the gap and stay
> competitive with this, and other open source database features."
>
> Burrrn!
>
Apply ice to a
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Bèrto ëd Sèra wrote:
>> The Greater London Authority is also ditching Oracle in favour of PG. I
>> consulted them while they kick started their transition and the first new
>> PG/PostGIS only project is alre
On 5/24/2013 10:49 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Scott Marlowe
> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Bèrto ëd Sèra
>> wrote:
>>> The Greater London Authority is also ditching Oracle in favour of PG. I
>>> consulted them while they kick started their trans
By doing insert into a table using a query, it seems that all records of
consultation were included bypassing the AFTER INSERT triggers and as few as
after all the records already included, the TRIGGER is fired for each record, I
wonder if this occurrence is normal.
I created an example that dem
Hi Tom,
Thank you for your reply.
I checked and found some weird behavior: We have 32K blocksize.
The incorrect blocks started at block 41 and span over 115 blocks (41 to
155), at the exact block boundary of 32K. Then at 156th block, we have both
tuples with correct number of attributes as well as
1.) Server settingmemory: 32960116kB = 32GB2.) Current Postgresql configuration settings of note in my environment.enable_hashjoin=offwork_mem = 16MB #random_page_cost-4.0 <- defaultmaintenance_work_mem=256MBshared_buffers = 8GBserverdb=# explain analyze select count(*) as y0_ from SARS_ACTS this_
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 3:44 PM, wrote:
> Total runtime: 1606.728 ms 1.6 seconds <- very good response time
> improvement
>
> (7 rows)
>
> Questions:
>
> Any concerns with setting these conf variables you recommended; work_mem,
> random_page_cost dbserver wide (in postgresql,conf)?
>
> Thanks so
I am running a pg_receivexlog 9.2 client against a 9.1 server. It seems to
work. Comments in the code seem to indicate that this setup is workable.
However, pg_receivexlog is not part of the 9.1 source tree nor the rpm
package (as far as I see), so I am curious if there is some caveat that I
sur
24 matches
Mail list logo
