[ome-users] Problem with big images

[harri.jaalinoja at helsinki.fi]

Hi again,

I did like this:

omero=> delete from configuration where value = '-1';
DELETE 1
omero=>
omero=> select * from configuration;
                   name                  |                value
----------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
  omero.db.uuid                          | 6df54e27-c91b-4ed2-8a02-ea8f43285fa3
  pixelDataEventLogLoader.v1.current_id  | 2047
  PersistentEventLogLoader.v2.current_id | 2819
(3 rows)

omero=> alter table configuration add primary key (name);
NOTICE:  ALTER TABLE / ADD PRIMARY KEY will create implicit index  
"configuration_pkey" for table "configuration"
ALTER TABLE
omero=> \d configuration
         Table "public.configuration"
  Column |          Type          | Modifiers
--------+------------------------+-----------
  name   | character varying(255) | not null
  value  | text                   |
Indexes:
     "configuration_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (name)

omero=>


And then it seems to work :)  I draw a nice picture with Gimp,  
imported it. In the logs there is pyramid creation:
2012-06-15 12:21:05,538 INFO  [                 
ome.io.nio.PixelsService] (3-thread-3) Creating BfPixelBuffer:  
/data/OMERO/Files/202 Series: 0
2012-06-15 12:21:05,539 INFO  [                 
ome.io.nio.PixelsService] (3-thread-3) Destination pyramid tile size:  
java.awt.Dimension[width=256,height=256]
2012-06-15 12:21:05,540 INFO  [                 
ome.io.nio.PixelsService] (3-thread-3) Pyramid creation for Pixels:151  
1/768 (0%).
2012-06-15 12:21:11,637 INFO  [                 
ome.io.nio.PixelsService] (3-thread-3) Pyramid creation for Pixels:151  
77/768 (9%).
2012-06-15 12:21:15,948 INFO  [                 
ome.io.nio.PixelsService] (3-thread-3) Pyramid creation for Pixels:151  
153/768 (19%).


And in Insight I can see the big image. Pretty nice actually, I didn't  
see the big image feature in action before.

So problem solved, the original cause however is still a bit of a mystery :)

Cheers,
Harri


Quoting harri.jaalinoja at helsinki.fi:

> Hi Josh,
>
>>
>> can you also show me the definition of the configuration table:
>>
>> omero=# \d configuration
>>       Table "public.configuration"
>> Column |          Type          | Modifiers
>> --------+------------------------+-----------
>> name   | character varying(255) | not null
>> value  | text                   |
>> Indexes:
>>   "configuration_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (name)
>>
>
>
> [omero at lmu-omero2 ~]$ psql -h localhost -U omero omero
> Password for user omero:
> psql (9.1.4)
> Type "help" for help.
>
> omero=> \d configuration
>        Table "public.configuration"
> Column |          Type          | Modifiers
> --------+------------------------+-----------
> name   | character varying(255) | not null
> value  | text                   |
>
> omero=>
>
>
>
>> In my DB, "name" is a unique primary key, but you have two values  
>> that are identical. In fact, if I try to load in your values to my  
>> DB I get this:
>>
>> psql:/tmp/config.sql:5: ERROR:  duplicate key value violates unique  
>> constraint "configuration_pkey"
>> DETAIL:  Key (name)=(pixelDataEventLogLoader.v1.current_id) already exists.
>>
>
> It seems somehow the primary key constraint is missing from my db,  
> if it is supposed to show up as an index like in your example. How  
> it could have gone missing I have no idea.
>
> This is from the SQL script that originally was used to create the database:
> [omero at lmu-omero2 OMERO.server-Beta-4.3.3]$ grep -i configuration  
> OMERO4.3__0.sql
> ...
> create table configuration ( name varchar(255) primary key, value text );
> ...
>
> So to fix this in place, it might be enough to first remove the  
> offending entry (with value -1) from the 'configuration' table, and  
> then add the primary key constraint?
>
> Cheers,
> Harri
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ome-users mailing list
> ome-users at lists.openmicroscopy.org.uk
> http://lists.openmicroscopy.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/ome-users
>