Thread: Fwd: Re: [ADMIN] Can i write a time-trigger?
Hi, I don't know all the in and out of pgagent, but I think he's right in his complaint (unfortunately not in the way he did complain). Should we really have "dbname=postgres" instead of "dbname=pgadmin" or am I missing something obvious? -- Guillaume. http://www.postgresqlfr.org http://dalibo.com Wow! Thanks a lot! That was a great deal of help! :-) On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Jure Kobal <j.kobal@gmx.com> wrote: > > > -- While running the pgagent daemon, what dbname should i specify? Is it > > postgres or pgadmin (as the example in > > > http://www.enterprisedb.com/docs/en/8.3/tools/pgadmin/1.8.2/pgagent-install > > .html) ? > > postgres. Since that is the database, pgagent is only a schema inside it. > The problem is that sites like the above and http://www.pgadmin.org/docs/1.8/pgagent-install.html are misleading, giving dbname=pgadmin in their example, while they clearly mention that we should create the pgagent catalogs in the 'postgres' database. Really careless of them! > > -- I managed to create a 'Job' in pgAdmin with the Definition specifying > a > > call to my stored proc (without referencing the database). > > How did you manage this? When you select SQL as the type of the step it > won't > let you create the step without the database name. > You are right. I had actually selected the database when creating the step, but i had assumed that to be a 'target' for the step to run on, rather than a reference for the sql. And i had forgotten about it. Anyways, my mistake. Sorry! > If you wan't to debug it you can run it with "-f" and "-l 2". With that it > will run in foreground(-f) and debug mode(-l 2). That way you can see what > it's doing. > > This is amazingly helpful. More than i had imagined. Thanks! What i had initially thought by looking at pgagent --help which claims that with the -l option, 0 is error, 1 is warning, 2 is debug and 0 is default. So i had thought that any error should be automatically flagged by the process when i run it in foreground (-f). Including 'database pgadmin does not exist'. But it didn't. On further investigation after your suggestion, i found that this is considered only a 'warning' and not an 'error'! So it is flagged with -l 1 or 2, but not with 0. Isn't this ridiculous! So now i know why my job wasn't running! And the -l 2 option (debug mode) is really great! It gives me so many details i'm thrilled! :-) Anyways thanks a lot! Now i'm up and running! :-) Thanks, Shruthi
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > Hi, > > I don't know all the in and out of pgagent, but I think he's right in his > complaint (unfortunately not in the way he did complain). Should we really > have "dbname=postgres" instead of "dbname=pgadmin" or am I missing something > obvious? Yes, probably. iirc, those docs were written before we had a postgres database as standard - and we certainly didn't recommend using template1 which was the old default maintenance DB. > This is amazingly helpful. More than i had imagined. Thanks! What i had initially > thought by looking at pgagent --help which claims that with the -l option, 0 is error, > 1 is warning, 2 is debug and 0 is default. So i had thought that any error should > be automatically flagged by the process when i run it in foreground (-f). Including > 'database pgadmin does not exist'. But it didn't. On further investigation after your > suggestion, i found that this is considered only a 'warning' and not an 'error'! So it > is flagged with -l 1 or 2, but not with 0. Isn't this ridiculous! It's a warning because it doesn't cause a hard failure. It'll keep trying to connect, and then give up with an error after 10 or so attempts over a period of time. It's done that way to allow for race conditions in init scripts, or systems where PostgreSQL starts in a timely fashion, but doesn't come up immediately because it goes into recovery for example. > So now i know why my job wasn't running! > And the -l 2 option (debug mode) is really great! It gives me so many details i'm thrilled! :-) Yeah, you get to see the threaded pooler at work. A simple piece of code really, but strangely satisfying to finish writing. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Le jeudi 19 novembre 2009 à 08:09:16, Dave Page a écrit : > On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Guillaume Lelarge > > <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I don't know all the in and out of pgagent, but I think he's right in his > > complaint (unfortunately not in the way he did complain). Should we > > really have "dbname=postgres" instead of "dbname=pgadmin" or am I missing > > something obvious? > > Yes, probably. iirc, those docs were written before we had a postgres > database as standard - and we certainly didn't recommend using > template1 which was the old default maintenance DB. > Fixed. -- Guillaume. http://www.postgresqlfr.org http://dalibo.com