Connect Symfony project to docker database - postgresql

I'm currently working on a project, that works with bag-files.
Therefore I'm using a tool called bag-database(https://github.com/swri-robotics/bag-database), where the database is running as two docker containers.
I followed the instructions on the site really closely and got it up and running on port 8080. The other container is running on port 5432.
So now I'm kind of having trouble to connect the Symfony project with the database.
I used port 5432 in the config file and then ran php app/console doctrine:database:create and it created a new postgres database, but it was empty.
So my question is: How can I get all the tables and columns from the bag database to be able to map them properly in the project? Or is it not possible to use the tool in that way?
Any help is really appreciated!

when you ran doctrine:database:create it only created the database as thats what its supposed to do.
What you need is a schema.
As you have an existing database, you will need to reverse engineer the schema from your existing database tables etc.
Fortunately, Symfony already thought of that, and has a set of commands that you can use to do that.
Make sure you check the resulting classes carefully though, I've not used it in a while, but when I have it is possible for it to make mistakes.

Related

PGAdmin restore remote database [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Export and import table dump (.sql) using pgAdmin
(6 answers)
Closed 1 year ago.
Let I first state that I am not a DBA-guy but I do have a question regarding restoring remote databases using PG Admin.
I have this PG Admin tool (v4.27) running in a Docker container and I use this portal to maintain two separate Postgress databases, both running in a Docker container as well. I installed PG Agent in both database containers and run scheduled daily backup's, defined via PG Admin and stored in the container of each corresponding databases. So far so good.
Now I want to restore one of these databases by using the latest daily backup file (*.sql), but the Restore Dialog of PG Admin only looks for files stored locally (the PG Admin container)?
Whatever I tried or searched for on the internet, to me it seems not possible to show a list of remote backup files in PG Admin or run manually a remote SQL file. Is this even possible in PG Admin? Running psql in the query editor is not possible (duh ...) and due to not finding the remote SQL-restore file I have no clue how to run this code within PG Admin on the remote corresponding database container.
The one and only solution so far I can think of, is scheduling a restore which has no calendar and should be triggered manually when needed, but it's not the prettiest solution.
Do I miss something or did I overlook the right documentation or have I created a silly, unmaintainable solution?
Thanks in advance for thinking along and kind regards,
Aad Dijksman
You cannot restore a plain format dump (an SQL script) with pgAdmin. You will have to use psql, the command line client.
COPY statements and data are mixed in such a dump, and that would make pgAdmin choke.
The solution by #Laurenz Albe points out that it is best to use the command line psql here, and that would be my first go-to.
However, if for whatever reason you don't have access to the command line and are only able to connect to this database via pgadmin, there is another solution which you can find here:
Export and import table dump (.sql) using pgAdmin
I recommend looking at the solution by Tomas Greif.

PostgreSQL in-memory [duplicate]

I want to run a small PostgreSQL database which runs in memory only, for each unit test I write. For instance:
#Before
void setUp() {
String port = runPostgresOnRandomPort();
connectTo("postgres://localhost:"+port+"/in_memory_db");
// ...
}
Ideally I'll have a single postgres executable checked into the version control, which the unit test will use.
Something like HSQL, but for postgres. How can I do that?
Were can I get such a Postgres version? How can I instruct it not to use the disk?
(Moving my answer from Using in-memory PostgreSQL and generalizing it):
You can't run Pg in-process, in-memory
I can't figure out how to run in-memory Postgres database for testing. Is it possible?
No, it is not possible. PostgreSQL is implemented in C and compiled to platform code. Unlike H2 or Derby you can't just load the jar and fire it up as a throwaway in-memory DB.
Its storage is filesystem based, and it doesn't have any built-in storage abstraction that would allow you to use a purely in-memory datastore. You can point it at a ramdisk, tempfs, or other ephemeral file system storage though.
Unlike SQLite, which is also written in C and compiled to platform code, PostgreSQL can't be loaded in-process either. It requires multiple processes (one per connection) because it's a multiprocessing, not a multithreading, architecture. The multiprocessing requirement means you must launch the postmaster as a standalone process.
Use throwaway containers
Since I originally wrote this the use of containers has become widespread, well understood and easy.
It should be a no-brainer to just configure a throw-away postgres instance in a Docker container for your test uses, then tear it down at the end. You can speed it up with hacks like LD_PRELOADing libeatmydata to disable that pesky "don't corrupt my data horribly on crash" feature ;).
There are a lot of wrappers to automate this for you for any test suite and language or toolchain you would like.
Alternative: preconfigure a connection
(Written before easy containerization; no longer recommended)
I suggest simply writing your tests to expect a particular hostname/username/password to work, and having the test harness CREATE DATABASE a throwaway database, then DROP DATABASE at the end of the run. Get the database connection details from a properties file, build target properties, environment variable, etc.
It's safe to use an existing PostgreSQL instance you already have databases you care about in, so long as the user you supply to your unit tests is not a superuser, only a user with CREATEDB rights. At worst you'll create performance issues in the other databases. I prefer to run a completely isolated PostgreSQL install for testing for that reason.
Instead: Launch a throwaway PostgreSQL instance for testing
Alternately, if you're really keen you could have your test harness locate the initdb and postgres binaries, run initdb to create a database, modify pg_hba.conf to trust, run postgres to start it on a random port, create a user, create a DB, and run the tests. You could even bundle the PostgreSQL binaries for multiple architectures in a jar and unpack the ones for the current architecture to a temporary directory before running the tests.
Personally I think that's a major pain that should be avoided; it's way easier to just have a test DB configured. However, it's become a little easier with the advent of include_dir support in postgresql.conf; now you can just append one line, then write a generated config file for all the rest.
Faster testing with PostgreSQL
For more information about how to safely improve the performance of PostgreSQL for testing purposes, see a detailed answer I wrote on this topic earlier: Optimise PostgreSQL for fast testing
H2's PostgreSQL dialect is not a true substitute
Some people instead use the H2 database in PostgreSQL dialect mode to run tests. I think that's almost as bad as the Rails people using SQLite for testing and PostgreSQL for production deployment.
H2 supports some PostgreSQL extensions and emulates the PostgreSQL dialect. However, it's just that - an emulation. You'll find areas where H2 accepts a query but PostgreSQL doesn't, where behaviour differs, etc. You'll also find plenty of places where PostgreSQL supports doing something that H2 just can't - like window functions, at the time of writing.
If you understand the limitations of this approach and your database access is simple, H2 might be OK. But in that case you're probably a better candidate for an ORM that abstracts the database because you're not using its interesting features anyway - and in that case, you don't have to care about database compatibility as much anymore.
Tablespaces are not the answer!
Do not use a tablespace to create an "in-memory" database. Not only is it unnecessary as it won't help performance significantly anyway, but it's also a great way to disrupt access to any other you might care about in the same PostgreSQL install. The 9.4 documentation now contains the following warning:
WARNING
Even though located outside the main PostgreSQL data directory,
tablespaces are an integral part of the database cluster and cannot be
treated as an autonomous collection of data files. They are dependent
on metadata contained in the main data directory, and therefore cannot
be attached to a different database cluster or backed up individually.
Similarly, if you lose a tablespace (file deletion, disk failure,
etc), the database cluster might become unreadable or unable to start.
Placing a tablespace on a temporary file system like a ramdisk risks
the reliability of the entire cluster.
because I noticed too many people were doing this and running into trouble.
(If you've done this you can mkdir the missing tablespace directory to get PostgreSQL to start again, then DROP the missing databases, tables etc. It's better to just not do it.)
Or you could create a TABLESPACE in a ramfs / tempfs and create all your objects there.
I recently was pointed to an article about doing exactly that on Linux. The original link is dead. But it was archived (provided by Arsinclair):
https://web.archive.org/web/20160319031016/http://magazine.redhat.com/2007/12/12/tip-from-an-rhce-memory-storage-on-postgresql/
Warning
This can endanger the integrity of your whole database cluster.
Read the added warning in the manual.
So this is only an option for expendable data.
For unit-testing it should work just fine. If you are running other databases on the same machine, be sure to use a separate database cluster (which has its own port) to be safe.
This is not possible with Postgres. It does not offer an in-process/in-memory engine like HSQLDB or MySQL.
If you want to create a self-contained environment you can put the Postgres binaries into SVN (but it's more than just a single executable).
You will need to run initdb to setup your test database before you can do anything with this. This can be done from a batch file or by using Runtime.exec(). But note that initdb is not something that is fast. You will definitely not want to run that for each test. You might get away running this before your test-suite though.
However while this can be done, I'd recommend to have a dedicated Postgres installation where you simply recreate your test database before running your tests.
You can re-create the test-database by using a template database which makes creating it quite fast (a lot faster than running initdb for each test run)
Now it is possible to run an in-memory instance of PostgreSQL in your JUnit tests via the Embedded PostgreSQL Component from OpenTable: https://github.com/opentable/otj-pg-embedded.
By adding the dependency to the otj-pg-embedded library (https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/com.opentable.components/otj-pg-embedded) you can start and stop your own instance of PostgreSQL in your #Before and #Afer hooks:
EmbeddedPostgres pg = EmbeddedPostgres.start();
They even offer a JUnit rule to automatically have JUnit starting and stopping your PostgreSQL database server for you:
#Rule
public SingleInstancePostgresRule pg = EmbeddedPostgresRules.singleInstance();
You could use TestContainers to spin up a PosgreSQL docker container for tests:
http://testcontainers.viewdocs.io/testcontainers-java/usage/database_containers/
TestContainers provide a JUnit #Rule/#ClassRule: this mode starts a database inside a container before your tests and tears it down afterwards.
Example:
public class SimplePostgreSQLTest {
#Rule
public PostgreSQLContainer postgres = new PostgreSQLContainer();
#Test
public void testSimple() throws SQLException {
HikariConfig hikariConfig = new HikariConfig();
hikariConfig.setJdbcUrl(postgres.getJdbcUrl());
hikariConfig.setUsername(postgres.getUsername());
hikariConfig.setPassword(postgres.getPassword());
HikariDataSource ds = new HikariDataSource(hikariConfig);
Statement statement = ds.getConnection().createStatement();
statement.execute("SELECT 1");
ResultSet resultSet = statement.getResultSet();
resultSet.next();
int resultSetInt = resultSet.getInt(1);
assertEquals("A basic SELECT query succeeds", 1, resultSetInt);
}
}
If you are using NodeJS, you can use pg-mem (disclaimer: I'm the author) to emulate the most common features of a postgres db.
You will have a full in-memory, isolated, platform-agnostic database replicating PG behaviour (it even runs in browsers).
I wrote an article to show how to use it for your unit tests here.
There is now an in-memory version of PostgreSQL from Russian Search company named Yandex: https://github.com/yandex-qatools/postgresql-embedded
It's based on Flapdoodle OSS's embed process.
Example of using (from github page):
// starting Postgres
final EmbeddedPostgres postgres = new EmbeddedPostgres(V9_6);
// predefined data directory
// final EmbeddedPostgres postgres = new EmbeddedPostgres(V9_6, "/path/to/predefined/data/directory");
final String url = postgres.start("localhost", 5432, "dbName", "userName", "password");
// connecting to a running Postgres and feeding up the database
final Connection conn = DriverManager.getConnection(url);
conn.createStatement().execute("CREATE TABLE films (code char(5));");
I'm using it some time. It works well.
UPDATED: this project is not being actively maintained anymore
Please be adviced that the main maintainer of this project has successfuly
migrated to the use of Test Containers project. This is the best possible
alternative nowadays.
If you can use docker you can mount postgresql data directory in memory for testing
docker run --tmpfs=/data -e PGDATA=/data postgres
You can also use PostgreSQL configuration settings (such as those detailed in the question and accepted answer here) to achieve performance without necessarily resorting to an in-memory database.
If you're using java, there is a library I've seen effectively used that provides an in memory "embedded" postgres environment used mostly for unit tests.
https://github.com/opentable/otj-pg-embedded
This might be able to solve your use case if you've come to this search result looking for the answer.
If have full control over your environment, you arguably want to run postgreSQL on zfs.

Connection to CloudBees database using MySQL Workbench

I've just uploaded my locally developed app to CloudBees. It works fine: I can load the web pages and it can access the database.
However, I cannot connect to its database (also provided by CloudBees) using MySQL Workbench or the command line tool. It always says
Can't connect to MySQL server on 'ec2-50-19-213-178.compute-1.amazonaws.com' (10060)
Any CloudBees configuration that I might be missing?
double check your database connection parameters using SDK : bees db:info -p <databasename>
you should be able to connect to DB using mysql workbench and other mysql tools.
In the MySQL forum exists a collection of links for various types of connections using MySQL Workbench. One is probably especially interesting for you as it deals with Amazon RDS databases. Among others it shows what connection parameters are needed.
Seems that there were some firewall problems in the corporate router that prevented me from connecting before. I tried at home and it worked.

Cloudfoundry relation "user" does not exist

I'm currently trying to deploy my application in cloudfoundry. My web is built on spring+postgre+hibernate. The problem I'm having is whenever I try to access the database, I'm having an error relation "user" does not exist.
I am sure that it is properly connecting to a postgres database. But my problem is that , it seems like it is not connecting to my local database but instead to somewhere else that's why it can't access the user table I defined.
I've tried to execute some query like "select * from pg_tables", and it executes well but the result is not the same with my local database. I've also seen that the table owner is vcap. I wonder why I'm having this error and how I could solve it.
I've been trying to fix these a couple of days. But to no avail that's why I've already posted here.
I hope someone could help me here.
I'll appreciate it a lot!
As a follow-on to ebottard's comment suggestion that addresses provisioning a service,
a way to prepopulate the database is to use a tunnel which connects your postgres client to the cloudfoundry postgres database, as described in Tunneling to a Cloudfoundry Service.

Logging into Mongo on Amazon's EC2 (AWS) with MongoVUE

This question is specific to MongoVUE, but really I am looking to be able to log in to Mongo on EC2 in any way besides through the SSH tunnel. I can do that and get a server and client up and running, create documents, find things etc. I am new to mongo and ec2 so I will admit there are a lot of variables.
Here is what I've done so far:
I have created a unique database and then added a user to that with the db.addUser('name','password') command.
I am using the public dns that AWS provided which looks like, xxxx.us-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com
I have tried to log in with the plain text password as well as the one mongo displays (hashed).
My ultimate goal is to be able to connect through C#, but MongoVue gives me an easier platform to fiddle around with (I hope).
Any help would be great! Thank you.
I was trying to do the same thing and it actually ended up being pretty easy after following the instructions on Mongovue's Blog
http://www.mongovue.com/2011/08/04/mongovue-connection-to-remote-server-over-ssh/
This allows you to not have to open up the MongoDB port externally also.
Make sure you also convert your EC2 .pem key to a Putty Key via PuttyGen first.
Okay, I solved it for those of you that will find this question and be in the same boat. For some reason I could not change my security group on ec2 to the one I had given access to port 27017. So I added that port exception to the security group that was currently assigned to my instance.
I then had to log in through SSH to get the Mongo server up and running (simply run the mongod command in the bin directory) and then it logged right in. I used the username and password that I had set up earlier through the mongo command line.
I hope this helps someone.