PG 8.0.4, Centos and 64 bit

Tony Caduto wrote:

On Wednesday 12 October 2005 17:06 pm, Brian Mathis wrote:

Hello,

I am getting ready to install a new server for a new postgres install, and
I'm looking for a little advice. The server is a dual opteron system, and I
plan on using CentOS 4.1 x86_64 for the OS. I'm going to do my best to make
it s pure 64 bit system.

Does anyone have any experience running this configuration? Does postgres
play nice on centos 4.1? x86_64?

centos 4.1 is just Redhat ES/AS 4.1 it should do fine.

Also, are there any rpms for this setup? I looked in the binary section for
rpms, but all the directories were empty.

Thanks.

I compiled it from source on a HP DL385 opteron(64bit mode) with Red Hat 4.1,
so it should work just fine on CentOS.

Tony Caduto
AM Software Design
Home of PG Lightning Admin for Postgresql 8.x
http://www.amsoftwaredesign.com

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

--
Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/

On Wednesday 12 October 2005 17:06 pm, Brian Mathis wrote:

Hello,

I am getting ready to install a new server for a new postgres install, and
I'm looking for a little advice. The server is a dual opteron system, and I
plan on using CentOS 4.1 x86_64 for the OS. I'm going to do my best to make
it s pure 64 bit system.

Does anyone have any experience running this configuration? Does postgres
play nice on centos 4.1? x86_64?

Also, are there any rpms for this setup? I looked in the binary section for
rpms, but all the directories were empty.

Thanks.

I compiled it from source on a HP DL385 opteron(64bit mode) with Red Hat 4.1,
so it should work just fine on CentOS.

Tony Caduto
AM Software Design
Home of PG Lightning Admin for Postgresql 8.x
http://www.amsoftwaredesign.com

Hi,

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005, Brian Mathis wrote:

Also, are there any rpms for this setup? I looked in the binary section for
rpms, but all the directories were empty.

We currently don't have a x86_64 server that runs RHEL 4. That's why
there are no RPMs for that arch (I've uploaded RPMs for many platforms
BTW). If someone wants to assist us to build RPMs for that platform,
please contact me. We'll give you all the necesarry information.

Regards,
--
Devrim GUNDUZ
Kivi Bili�im Teknolojileri - http://www.kivi.com.tr
devrim~gunduz.org, devrim~PostgreSQL.org, devrim.gunduz~linux.org.tr
http://www.gunduz.org

From pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org Mon Oct 17 18:37:10 2005

X-Original-To: pgsql-general-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144])
by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 679BDD7B4F
for <pgsql-general-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>; Mon, 17 Oct 2005 18:37:09 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 16128-09
for <pgsql-general-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
Mon, 17 Oct 2005 21:37:06 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from bos-gate3.raytheon.com (bos-gate3.raytheon.com [199.46.198.232])
by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FE0BD7AC5
for <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>; Mon, 17 Oct 2005 18:37:07 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from ds02e00.directory.ray.com (ds02e00.directory.ray.com [147.25.130.245])
by bos-gate3.raytheon.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j9HLb8hF027380
for <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>; Mon, 17 Oct 2005 17:37:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ds02e00 (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ds02e00.directory.ray.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id j9HLb2SI016738
for <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>; Mon, 17 Oct 2005 21:37:02 GMT
Received: from ds02e00.directory.ray.com with LMTP by ds02e00 (2.0.6/sieved-2-0-build-559)
for <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>; Mon, 17 Oct 2005 21:37:01 +0000
Received: from notesserver5.ftw.us.ray.com (notesserver5.ftw.us.ray.com [151.168.70.34])
by ds02e00.directory.ray.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id j9HLathx016703
sender Richard_D_Levine@raytheon.com for <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>; Mon, 17 Oct 2005 21:36:57 GMT
In-Reply-To: <10656.1129574664@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Oracle buys Innobase
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
Message-ID: <OFAC12F719.7542EE85-ON0525709D.007663C5-0525709D.0076BBEA@ftw.us.ray.com>
From: Richard_D_Levine@raytheon.com
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 16:36:53 -0500
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on NotesServer5/HDC(Release 6.5.2|June 01, 2004) at 10/17/2005
04:36:57 PM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-SPAM: 0.00
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.204 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.026, NO_REAL_NAME=0.178]
X-Spam-Level:
X-Archive-Number: 200510/1022
X-Sequence-Number: 85251

pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org wrote on 10/17/2005 01:44:24 PM:

<snip>

(BTW, has anyone looked lately to see how far away Postgres is from
being able to run SAP?)

Uh, Tom? Are you in the habit of waiving red capes in front of bulls? :)

I assume the question was rhetorical, due to MySQL's capability gap with
PostgreSQL.

Devrim GUNDUZ wrote:

We currently don't have a x86_64 server that runs RHEL 4. That's why
there are no RPMs for that arch (I've uploaded RPMs for many platforms
BTW). If someone wants to assist us to build RPMs for that platform,
please contact me. We'll give you all the necesarry information.

I will have several RHEL 4 servers by early November, and will be
building RPMs for them. I'll let you know when I have RPMs ready.

Joe

Hi,

On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Joe Conway wrote:

We currently don't have a x86_64 server that runs RHEL 4. That's why there
are no RPMs for that arch (I've uploaded RPMs for many platforms BTW). If
someone wants to assist us to build RPMs for that platform, please contact
me. We'll give you all the necesarry information.

I will have several RHEL 4 servers by early November, and will be building
RPMs for them. I'll let you know when I have RPMs ready.

Great news. Thanks Joe.

--
Devrim GUNDUZ
Kivi Bili�im Teknolojileri - http://www.kivi.com.tr
devrim~gunduz.org, devrim~PostgreSQL.org, devrim.gunduz~linux.org.tr
http://www.gunduz.org

From pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org Tue Oct 18 04:18:30 2005

X-Original-To: pgsql-general-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144])
by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BA17D83B9
for <pgsql-general-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>; Tue, 18 Oct 2005 04:18:29 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 68193-04
for <pgsql-general-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
Tue, 18 Oct 2005 07:18:26 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from web52912.mail.yahoo.com (web52912.mail.yahoo.com [206.190.49.22])
by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 06FF2D7E76
for <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>; Tue, 18 Oct 2005 04:18:26 -0300 (ADT)
Received: (qmail 82488 invoked by uid 60001); 18 Oct 2005 07:18:24 -0000
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
b=lph4y4Xvv8niy2SCHAWch74ozfR16SrARppGiF2WnBiDuELML7DbOSUqvLDjeIs0m6h5XycRva4RFAPI71AZpDSMQ8SPzuLQpStcn8JHkF9XAEYdeRIbblztKOjafYBRrjytoArIoz8abZZT1iNC0gI9OAHfRMK3dV/BnoJ6jjI= ;
Message-ID: <20051018071824.82486.qmail@web52912.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [67.174.117.34] by web52912.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 18 Oct 2005 00:18:24 PDT
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 00:18:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: CSN <cool_screen_name90001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Duplicate primary keys/rows
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <5567.1128976137@sss.pgh.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.377 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.126,
DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE=0.374, FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS=0.516, FROM_HAS_ULINE_NUMS=0.361]
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Archive-Number: 200510/1033
X-Sequence-Number: 85262

I don't know if I'm going to get a copy of
pg_filedump. What's the best way to fix this - dump
then restore?

CSN

--- Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

CSN <cool_screen_name90001@yahoo.com> writes:

oid | ctid | xmin | cmin | xmax |

cmax | id

--------+-----------+---------+------+---------+------+-----

125466 | (2672,11) | 1445346 | 0 | 1481020 |

0 | 985

125466 | (2745,50) | 1481020 | 0 | 1682425 |

2 | 985

Hmm. The fact that the dup rows have the same OID
indicates pretty
strongly that they are actually two versions of the
same row, and
not two independently inserted rows. Furthermore we
can see that xact
1481020 deleted the first version and inserted the
second (note I took
the liberty of rearranging your output to make the
rows appear in
chronological order).

So the index hasn't screwed up, exactly; the problem
is that both rows
appear as good at the same time. But why?

It's really highly annoying that we can't see the
contents of the
infomasks for the rows. Would you be willing to
grab a copy of
pg_filedump and dump out these two data pages so we
can see the
complete tuple headers?

(If you don't have a compiler then you'd need to
find a precompiled
copy of pg_filedump for Windows. I don't know if
anyone's made one
available.)

Given that you say the machine has been crashing, my
bet is that a crash
caused the loss of pg_clog status for xid 1481020 at
a time when
2745,50's xmin had been marked committed good, but
2672,11's xmax had
not been similarly marked. We have sufficient
defenses against this
sort of thing *if the disk drive does not lie about
write complete*.
(Unfortunately the vast majority of el-cheapo PCs
are configured to lie
with abandon, which means that we can't guarantee
data consistency
across power failures on such hardware.) It'd be
nice to get direct
confirmation of that theory though.

regards, tom lane

__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com