Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F9C864FCD6 for ; Wed, 17 Sep 2008 17:08:00 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 12366-08 for ; Wed, 17 Sep 2008 17:07:52 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com [209.85.198.233]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D39664FD00 for ; Wed, 17 Sep 2008 17:07:48 -0300 (ADT) Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id b25so4356976rvf.43 for ; Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:07:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=/L/uCPe2TN2sYSZkn4SrpetqcQQ/9z16RrfT8vdIhAE=; b=NLQ2F6WHfdso63sBW/7kbN08RAWHf5Lom76yaGCfU8kbTZCJJ3gIw3qdsZCRm4KyeU b1+47I3zflfGGtOSJ/6iZNiAAhO1XWHuF+vymjyhHvZ8/uh1s0K0nlni1EADpAVxo3Xw 5LL5M3b/cWEh2ilnMo8NDzWUmOkvGNklLfy7k= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=m99e6x8IoHLDIySiK3d8eg5cnLtGOFAfssD6HCB57oktLqOtAxzFV9sJ4Qy+0AAdQ8 a+uy5eSrRm94y4Z7tm5qhqvy4SuPmXky9QfJbtvmCNuL6kBq7A3H48zrdGbVUYbytIbo +JRwECAY4rSzqu62IMdB89WdtDJcmOxEbTN5M= Received: by 10.140.204.7 with SMTP id b7mr6813499rvg.175.1221682065949; Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:07:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.74.11 with HTTP; Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:07:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 14:07:45 -0600 From: "Scott Marlowe" To: "Guido Barosio" Subject: Re: Heavy postgres process Cc: "Kenneth Marshall" , Vivek_Sharan , "pgsql-admin@postgresql.org" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <5465CC59A600E2408FFBF84350B938345031E95B93@AUSMELMBX01.ad.infosys.com> <5465CC59A600E2408FFBF84350B9383450F4933C33@AUSMELMBX01.ad.infosys.com> <5465CC59A600E2408FFBF84350B9383450F4933E11@AUSMELMBX01.ad.infosys.com> <5465CC59A600E2408FFBF84350B9383450F4933E18@AUSMELMBX01.ad.infosys.com> <20080917183155.GA22468@it.is.rice.edu> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200809/183 X-Sequence-Number: 30276 On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 1:43 PM, Guido Barosio wrote: > Getting to the latest 7.4 server involves the same as going to the > latest 8.x server, AFAIK, if we take in consideration that 7.4.8 > requires a dump & restore (meaning downtime). 7.4.7 to 7.4.8 does NOT require a complete dump and restore. Been there, done it and got the tshirt. There's a minor fix in the catalogs that you can get by a single SQL command. > I would rather go after the latest 8.x server > > 2 cents. Me too. But the update to 7.4.21 or whatever the latest version is does NOT require a dump reload, and unless you need that one line sql fix, you don't even have to do that. I quote the 7.4.8 release notes: A dump/restore is not required for those running 7.4.X. However, it is one possible way of handling two significant security problems that have been found in the initial contents of 7.4.X system catalogs. A dump/initdb/reload sequence using 7.4.8's initdb will automatically correct these problems. and further down If you wish not to do an initdb, perform the following procedures instead. As the database superuser, do: BEGIN; UPDATE pg_proc SET proargtypes[3] = 'internal'::regtype WHERE pronamespace = 11 AND pronargs = 5 AND proargtypes[2] = 'cstring'::regtype; -- The command should report having updated 90 rows; -- if not, rollback and investigate instead of committing! COMMIT; Next, if you have installed contrib/tsearch2, do: and so on. > (It seems that Vivek works for Infosys, and that may explain the > reason for an Oracle migration in the future. They are prolly plenty > of Oracle DBA's working there, cheaper and reusable for sure if you > think that often the kind of clients they handle are already > oracle'ized ) especially if you can piggy back on someone else's oracle server that's already running.