Experience Seamless Full Ebook Downloads for Every Genre at textbookfull.

com

PostgreSQL for data architects discover how to

design develop and maintain your database
application effectively with PostgreSQL Maymala

https://textbookfull.com/product/postgresql-for-data-
architects-discover-how-to-design-develop-and-maintain-your-
database-application-effectively-with-postgresql-maymala/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWNLOAD NOW

Explore and download more ebook at https://textbookfull.com

 Recommended digital products (PDF, EPUB, MOBI) that
you can download immediately if you are interested.

Learning PostgreSQL 10 A beginner s guide to building high

performance PostgreSQL database solutions Juba

https://textbookfull.com/product/learning-postgresql-10-a-beginner-s-
guide-to-building-high-performance-postgresql-database-solutions-juba/

textboxfull.com

PostgreSQL 10 Administration Cookbook Over 165 effective

recipes for database management and maintenance in
PostgreSQL 10 4th Edition Simon Riggs
https://textbookfull.com/product/postgresql-10-administration-
cookbook-over-165-effective-recipes-for-database-management-and-
maintenance-in-postgresql-10-4th-edition-simon-riggs/
textboxfull.com

Procedural Programming with PostgreSQL PL/pgSQL: Design

Complex Database-Centric Applications with PL/pgSQL 1st
Edition Baji Shaik
https://textbookfull.com/product/procedural-programming-with-
postgresql-pl-pgsql-design-complex-database-centric-applications-with-
pl-pgsql-1st-edition-baji-shaik/
textboxfull.com

PostgreSQL High Availability Cookbook Master over 100

recipes to design and implement a highly available server
with the advanced features of PostgreSQL 2nd Edition Shaun
M. Thomas
https://textbookfull.com/product/postgresql-high-availability-
cookbook-master-over-100-recipes-to-design-and-implement-a-highly-
available-server-with-the-advanced-features-of-postgresql-2nd-edition-
shaun-m-thomas/
textboxfull.com
PostgreSQL Up and Running A Practical Guide to the
Advanced Open Source Database Regina O. Obe

https://textbookfull.com/product/postgresql-up-and-running-a-
practical-guide-to-the-advanced-open-source-database-regina-o-obe/

textboxfull.com

Learn PostgreSQL - Second Edition -.-

https://textbookfull.com/product/learn-postgresql-second-edition/

textboxfull.com

PostgreSQL Up and Running A Practical Guide to the

Advanced Open Source Database 3rd Edition Regina O. Obe

https://textbookfull.com/product/postgresql-up-and-running-a-
practical-guide-to-the-advanced-open-source-database-3rd-edition-
regina-o-obe/
textboxfull.com

Beginning PostgreSQL on the Cloud: Simplifying Database as

a Service on Cloud Platforms Baji Shaik

https://textbookfull.com/product/beginning-postgresql-on-the-cloud-
simplifying-database-as-a-service-on-cloud-platforms-baji-shaik/

textboxfull.com

Idea Searching for Design How to Research and Develop

Design Concepts David Bramston

https://textbookfull.com/product/idea-searching-for-design-how-to-
research-and-develop-design-concepts-david-bramston/

textboxfull.com
PostgreSQL for Data Architects

Discover how to design, develop, and maintain your

database application effectively with PostgreSQL

Jayadevan Maymala

BIRMINGHAM - MUMBAI
PostgreSQL for Data Architects

Copyright © 2015 Packt Publishing

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, without the prior written
permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embedded in
critical articles or reviews.

Every effort has been made in the preparation of this book to ensure the accuracy
of the information presented. However, the information contained in this book is
sold without warranty, either express or implied. Neither the author, nor Packt
Publishing, and its dealers and distributors will be held liable for any damages
caused or alleged to be caused directly or indirectly by this book.

Packt Publishing has endeavored to provide trademark information about all of the
companies and products mentioned in this book by the appropriate use of capitals.
However, Packt Publishing cannot guarantee the accuracy of this information.

First published: March 2015

Production reference: 1240315

Published by Packt Publishing Ltd.

Livery Place
35 Livery Street
Birmingham B3 2PB, UK.

ISBN 978-1-78328-860-1

www.packtpub.com

Cover image by Kai Stachowiak ([email protected])

 Credits

Author Project Coordinator

Jayadevan Maymala Judie Jose

Reviewers Proofreaders
Pascal Charest Maria Gould
Bahman Movaqar Clyde Jenkins
Ângelo Marcos Rigo Chris Smith
Hans-Jürgen Schönig Jonathan Todd
Stéphane Wirtel
Indexer
Commissioning Editor Hemangini Bari
Anthony Albuquerque
Graphics
Acquisition Editor Sheetal Aute
Sonali Vernekar Abhinash Sahu

Content Development Editors Production Coordinator

Rahul Nair Aparna Bhagat
Sharvari Tawde
Cover Work
Technical Editor Aparna Bhagat
Shashank Desai

Copy Editor
Relin Hedly
 About the Author

Jayadevan Maymala is a database developer, designer, and architect. He started

working with the Oracle database in 1999. Over the years, he has worked with DB2,
Sybase, and SQL Server. Of late, he has been working with open source technologies.
His database of choice is PostgreSQL. In his career, he has worked in different
domains spanning supply chain management, finance, and travel. He has spent
an equal amount of time working with databases supporting critical transaction
processing systems as well as data warehouses supporting analytical systems.

When he is not working on open source technologies, he spends time reading and
updating himself on economic and political issues.

I would like to thank my wife, Uma, for putting up with my

marathon writing sessions over weekends. I am also deeply indebted
to the PostgreSQL community, which has individuals who are
always promptly replying to my basic and not-so-basic queries.
It's an amazing team that has been working tirelessly to build such
a great database and then give it away for free with such liberal
licensing terms. Thank you.
 About the Reviewers

Pascal Charest is a cutting-edge technology professional working with a very wide

array of open source technologies.

He is currently leading system administrators in strategic planning of networked

infrastructures and is often consulted for system architecture design. He can be
reached via his LinkedIn profile at http://www.linkedin.com/in/pascalcharest.

I'd like to thank Anthony and Zachary for keeping me awake,

day and night.

Bahman Movaqar has been developing, deploying, and delivering software

for the past 14 years, ranging from embedded operating systems to ERP
implementations. He's an open source believer and a passionate amateur
chess player. He blogs at http://bahmanm.com/.

I'd like to thank my lovely wife, Nahid, who has taught me how to
be strong.
Ângelo Marcos Rigo has a strong background in web development since
1998, focusing on content management systems. For the past 7 years, he has been
managing, customizing, and developing extensions for Moodle LMS. He can be
reached at his website http://www.u4w.com.br/novosite/index.php for CMS or
Moodle LMS consulting. He has reviewed Moodle Security, Packt Publishing.

I would like to thank my wife, Janaina de Souza, and my daughter,

Lorena Rigo, for their support when I was away reviewing this book.

Hans-Jürgen Schönig has been involved in professional PostgreSQL training,

consulting, and support for more than 15 years now. He and his company Cybertec
Schönig & Schönig GmbH (http://www.cybertec.at/) are serving clients around
the globe and have worked on some of the world's largest PostgreSQL deployments.

Stéphane Wirtel is an enthusiast software craftsman who is interested in high

availability, replication, and distributed systems. Since 2000, he has been using
PostgreSQL with the Python programming language. Stephane gives talks on Python
and PostgreSQL in several conferences in Europe. The last one was called Python &
PostgreSQL, a Wonderful Wedding. He is also a former core developer of the Odoo
project, having worked on it for 6 years.

Stéphane is also a member of the Python Software Foundation and the

EuroPython Society. He promotes the Python programming language via the
PythonFOSDEM event at Brussels. You can reach him at http://wirtel.be/
or via Twitter @matrixise.

He works for Mgx.IO, a company that specializes in Python and Erlang

developments. You can reach this company at http://mgx.io/ or via Twitter
@mgxio. He has also reviewed the books Getting Started with PhantomJS and
PhantomJS Cookbook, both by Packt Publishing.

I would like to thank my wife, Anne, my daughter, Margaux,

my family and friends for their support, and the PostgreSQL
and Python communities for the awesome tools.
 www.PacktPub.com

Support files, eBooks, discount offers, and more

For support files and downloads related to your book, please visit
www.PacktPub.com.

Did you know that Packt offers eBook versions of every book published, with PDF
and ePub files available? You can upgrade to the eBook version at www.PacktPub.
com and as a print book customer, you are entitled to a discount on the eBook copy.
Get in touch with us at [email protected] for more details.

At www.PacktPub.com, you can also read a collection of free technical articles,

sign up for a range of free newsletters and receive exclusive discounts and offers
on Packt books and eBooks.
TM

https://www2.packtpub.com/books/subscription/packtlib

Do you need instant solutions to your IT questions? PacktLib is Packt's online digital
book library. Here, you can search, access, and read Packt's entire library of books.

Why subscribe?
• Fully searchable across every book published by Packt
• Copy and paste, print, and bookmark content
• On demand and accessible via a web browser

Free access for Packt account holders

If you have an account with Packt at www.PacktPub.com, you can use this to access
PacktLib today and view 9 entirely free books. Simply use your login credentials for
immediate access.
 Table of Contents
Preface vii
Chapter 1: Installing PostgreSQL 1
Installation options 1
Downloading and extracting the source 2
Inspecting the contents 3
Dependencies to compile the source 4
Configuring and creating the makefile 5
Building and creating the executables 8
Installing and moving the files to where they belong 9
Inspecting the changes 10
Initializing a cluster 11
A quick walk through the directories 14
Processes created 17
Important files created 17
Working with extensions 18
Summary 19
Chapter 2: Server Architecture 21
Starting with the daemon process 21
Understanding the shared buffer 23
Inspecting the buffer cache 25
Checkpoint 29
WAL and the WAL writer process 32
Recovery 34
Incremental backup and point-in-time recovery 34
Replication 34
The background writer 36
The autovacuum launcher process 37

[i]
Table of Contents

The logging process 41

The stats collector process 46
The WAL sender and WAL receiver 49
Sorting in memory with work_mem 49
Maintenance with maintenance_work_mem 51
Understanding effective_cache_size 53
Summary 54
Chapter 3: PostgreSQL – Object Hierarchy and Roles 55
The PostgreSQL cluster 55
Understanding tablespaces 56
Managing temporary objects with temporary tablespaces 59
Views 61
Databases, schemas, and search_path 61
Schemas – use cases 67
Roles and privileges 67
Summary 72
Chapter 4: Working with Transactions 73
Understanding transactions 73
ACID properties of transactions 76
A for atomicity 76
C for consistency 76
I for isolation 76
D for durability 85
PostgreSQL and MVCC 86
Summary 90
Chapter 5: Data Modeling with SQL Power Architect 91
Tools for databases and their uses 91
Database design tools 93
SQL Power Architect – downloading and installing 93
Creating tables 95
Generating SQL 97
Reverse engineering and making changes 100
Exporting the data model 101
Profiling 102
Summary 103
Chapter 6: Client Tools 105
GUI tools and command-line tools 105
pgAdmin – downloading and installation 105
Adding a server 106

[ ii ]
 Table of Contents

The pgAdmin main window 108

The Query tool 111
psql – working from the command line 114
psql – connection options 114
The power of \d 115
More meta-commands 117
Setting up the environment 120
History of commands 121
Summary 122
Chapter 7: SQL Tuning 123
Understanding basic facts about databases 123
Fact 1 – databases are more frequently read from than written to 123
Fact 2 – data is always read in blocks or pages, not as
individual records or columns 124
Approaches to reducing the number of blocks read/written 125
Query execution components 125
Planner 126
Access methods 126
Join strategies 127
Finding the execution plan 128
Optimization guidelines and catches 130
Indexing foreign keys 130
Using SELECT * 132
Using ORDER BY 133
Using DISTINCT 134
Using UNION ALL instead of UNION 134
Using functions in the FILTER clause 134
Reducing the number of SQL statements 137
Reducing function executions 138
Not using indexes 140
Partial indexes 142
Optimizing functions 143
Summary 145
Chapter 8: Server Tuning 147
Server-wide memory settings 147
shared_buffers 147
effective_cache_size 148
Managing writes, connections, and maintenance 149

[ iii ]
Table of Contents

Seek/scan cost and statistics parameters 151

CPU costs 155
Materialized views 157
Partitioned tables 160
Summary 165
Chapter 9: Tools to Move Data in and out of PostgreSQL 167
Setting up the production database – considerations 167
COPY 168
Fast loading with pg_bulkload 171
pg_dump 173
Filtering options 175
pg_dumpall 176
pg_restore 176
Summary 178
Chapter 10: Scaling, Replication, and Backup and Recovery 179
Scalability 179
Vertical scaling 181
Horizontal scaling 182
Master-slave(s) with read/write separation 182
Streaming replication 184
Connection pooling, load balancing, and failover with pgpool-II 189
Sharding 199
Multi-master full replication 201
Point-in-time recovery 202
Summary 206
Chapter 11: PostgreSQL – Troubleshooting 207
Connection issues 207
Authentication and permission issues 208
Parameter changes not effective 210
Query not responding 212
Summary 216
Chapter 12: PostgreSQL – Extras 217
Interesting data types 217
RANGE 218
Using network address types 220
hstore for key-value pairs 222
json/jsonb 224
XML 227
Inserting and verifying XML data 228
Generating XML files for table definitions and data 228

[ iv ]
 Table of Contents

Geometry and geography 229

Foreign Data Wrappers 229
FDW for files 230
PostgreSQL FDW 231
Data wrappers – other aspects 232
pgbadger 233
Features over time 236
Interesting features in 9.4 236
Keeping the buffer ready 236
Better recoverability 238
Easy-to-change parameters 238
Logical decoding and consumption of changes 239
Summary 240
Index 241

[v]
 Preface
PostgreSQL is an incredibly flexible and dependable open source relational database.
Harnessing its power will make your applications more reliable and extensible
without increasing costs. Using PostgreSQL's advanced features will save you work
and increase performance, once you've discovered how to set it up.

PostgreSQL for Data Architects will teach you everything you need to learn in order to
get a scalable and optimized PostgreSQL server up and running.

The book starts with basic concepts (such as installing PostgreSQL from source) and
covers theoretical aspects (such as concurrency and transaction management). After
this, you'll learn how to set up replication, use load balancing to scale horizontally,
and troubleshoot errors.

As you continue through this book, you will see the significant impact of
configuration parameters on performance, scalability, and transaction management.
Finally, you will get acquainted with useful tools available in the PostgreSQL
ecosystem used to analyze PostgreSQL logs, set up load balancing, and recovery.

What this book covers

Chapter 1, Installing PostgreSQL, provides an overview of the process to install
PostgreSQL from source. The chapter covers the prerequisites to compile from
source, and the process to initialize a cluster in Unix/Linux environment. It also
covers the directory structure.

Chapter 2, Server Architecture, covers the important processes started when we start a
PostgreSQL cluster and how they work along with the memory structures to provide
the functionality expected from a database management system.

[ vii ]
Preface

Chapter 3, PostgreSQL – Object Hierarchy and Roles, explains various object types and
objects provided by PostgreSQL. Important concepts such as databases, clusters,
tablespaces, and schemas are covered in this chapter.

Chapter 4, Working with Transactions, covers ACID properties of transactions, isolation

levels, and how PostgreSQL provides them. Multiversion concurrency control is
another topic dealt with in this chapter.

Chapter 5, Data Modeling with SQL Power Architect, talks about how we can model
tables and relationships with SQL Power Architect. Some of the aspects that should
be considered when we choose a design tool are also covered in this chapter.

Chapter 6, Client Tools, covers two clients tools (pgAdmin: a UI tool and psql: a
command-line tool). Browsing database objects, generating queries, and generating
the execution plan for queries using pgAdmin are covered. Setting up the
environment variables for connecting from psql, viewing history of SQL commands
executed, and meta-commands are also covered in this chapter.

Chapter 7, SQL Tuning, explains query optimization techniques. To set the context,
some patterns about database use and theory on how the PostgreSQL optimizer
works are covered.

Chapter 8, Server Tuning, covers PostgreSQL server settings that have significant
impact on query performance. These include memory settings, cost settings,
and so on. Two object types: partitions and materialized views are also
covered in this chapter.

Chapter 9, Tools to Move Data in and out of PostgreSQL, covers common tools/utilities,
such as pg_dump, pg_bulkload, and copy used to move data in and out
of PostgreSQL.

Chapter 10, Scaling, Replication, and Backup and Recovery, covers methods that
are usually used for achievability. A step-by-step method to achieve horizontal
scalability using PostgreSQL's streaming replication and pgpool-II is also presented.
Point-in-time recovery for PostgreSQL is also covered in this chapter.

Chapter 11, PostgreSQL – Troubleshooting, explains a few of the most common

problems developers run into when they start off with PostgreSQL and how
to troubleshoot them. Connection issues, privilege issues, and parameter setting
issues are also covered.

Chapter 12, PostgreSQL – Extras, covers quite a few topics. Some interesting data types
that every data architect should be aware of, a couple of really useful extensions, and
a tool to analyze PostgreSQL log files are covered. It also covers a few interesting
features available in PostgreSQL 9.4.

[ viii ]
 Preface

What you need for this book

A computer with access to the Internet is mandatory. It will definitely help if the
computer is running on a Unix/Linux operating system.

Who this book is for

You are expected to have some exposure to databases. Basic familiarity with
database objects such as tables and views is expected. You will find this book really
useful if you have no or a little exposure to PostgreSQL. If you have been working
with PostgreSQL for a few years, you should still find a few useful commands that
you were not aware of or a couple of optimization approaches you have not tried.
You will also gain more insight into how the database works.

Conventions
In this book, you will find a number of text styles that distinguish among different
kinds of information. Here are some examples of these styles and an explanation of
their meaning.

Code words in text, database table names, folder names, filenames, file extensions,
pathnames, dummy URLs, user input, and Twitter handles are shown as follows:
"We will use the following wget command to download the source."

A block of code/SQL at psql prompt as well as the output from the server at psql is
set as follows:
CREATE TABLE emp(id serial, first_name varchar(50));

Commands executed at shell/command prompt, the output, and parameters and

settings are formatted as follows:
[root@MyCentOS ~]# ps f -U postgres
PID TTY STAT TIME COMMAND
1918 tty1 S 0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres

New terms and important words are shown in bold.

[ ix ]
Preface

Warnings or important notes appear in a box like this.

Tips and tricks appear like this.

Reader feedback
Feedback from our readers is always welcome. Let us know what you think about
this book—what you liked or disliked. Reader feedback is important for us as it helps
us develop titles that you will really get the most out of.

To send us general feedback, simply e-mail [email protected], and mention

the book's title in the subject of your message.

If there is a topic that you have expertise in and you are interested in either writing
or contributing to a book, see our author guide at www.packtpub.com/authors.

Customer support
Now that you are the proud owner of a Packt book, we have a number of things to
help you to get the most from your purchase.

Downloading the example code

You can download the example code files from your account at http://www.
packtpub.com for all the Packt Publishing books you have purchased. If you
purchased this book elsewhere, you can visit http://www.packtpub.com/support
and register to have the files e-mailed directly to you.

[x]
 Preface

Errata
Although we have taken every care to ensure the accuracy of our content, mistakes
do happen. If you find a mistake in one of our books—maybe a mistake in the text or
the code—we would be grateful if you could report this to us. By doing so, you can
save other readers from frustration and help us improve subsequent versions of this
book. If you find any errata, please report them by visiting http://www.packtpub.
com/submit-errata, selecting your book, clicking on the Errata Submission Form
link, and entering the details of your errata. Once your errata are verified, your
submission will be accepted and the errata will be uploaded to our website or added
to any list of existing errata under the Errata section of that title.

To view the previously submitted errata, go to https://www.packtpub.com/books/

content/support and enter the name of the book in the search field. The required
information will appear under the Errata section.

Piracy
Piracy of copyrighted material on the Internet is an ongoing problem across all
media. At Packt, we take the protection of our copyright and licenses very seriously.
If you come across any illegal copies of our works in any form on the Internet, please
provide us with the location address or website name immediately so that we can
pursue a remedy.

Please contact us at [email protected] with a link to the suspected

pirated material.

We appreciate your help in protecting our authors and our ability to bring you
valuable content.

Questions
If you have a problem with any aspect of this book, you can contact us at
[email protected], and we will do our best to address the problem.

[ xi ]
 Installing PostgreSQL
This chapter gives you an overview of the process to install PostgreSQL from the
source. The system used for installation and providing examples in the following
sections is a 64-bit CentOS (6.4) machine. Other Unix/Linux systems typically have
similar commands. For those using Windows systems, there is a set of utilities
available at http://sourceforge.net/projects/unxutils/, which makes it
possible to execute most of the Unix commands (find, grep, cut, and so on) in the
Windows environment. The steps to be followed to install PostgreSQL on Windows
are very different compared to those for Unix/Linux systems and are not covered in
this chapter.

Installation options
There are many possible ways to install PostgreSQL on a system. For Windows,
downloading the Graphical Installer and using this is the easy way. For Linux systems
such as Red Hat Enterprise Linux or CentOS, we could either use Yellow dog Updater
Modified (yum) or Red Hat Package Manager or RPM Package Manager (rpm)
commands to install PostgreSQL. For Ubuntu, PostgreSQL can be installed using the
apt-get command, which in turn works with Ubuntu's Advanced Packaging Tool
(APT). While these options work, we do not get to see what is happening when we
execute these commands, except, of course, that the database gets installed.

Then there are situations where we might want to build from the source.
Assume that all we have is one production server and one development or staging
server. We are on version 9.3. Version 9.4 is about to be released and there are
quite a few interesting features in 9.4 that we want to try out. If we want to install 9.4
in the test server and use it alongside 9.3, without the installations stepping on each
other's toes, compiling from the source with the --prefix= option and specifying
different installation directories is the right approach. We could also set different
default ports. It's also possible that the new version (source) is ready, but the
package for our Linux distribution is not ready yet.

[1]
Installing PostgreSQL

We might use a flavor of Linux for which an installation package is not available at
all. Installation from source is the way forward in these situations. One advantage
with installing from the source is that we don't have to worry too much about
which package to download, the version of operating system (CentOS 6.3 or 6.4?),
architecture (32 bit or 64 bit), and so on. These are more or less irrelevant. Of course,
we should be using an operating system/architecture that is supported by the
database, but that's about it! We also need to download and install all the tools and
utilities necessary to compile and make the software, in this case, PostgreSQL.

So let's get down to it.

Downloading and extracting the source

The source for PostgreSQL is available at http://www.postgresql.org/ftp/
source/.

We can see a number of versions all the way down to version 1 when it was called
Postgres95 and up to the latest production and beta versions. If you belong to the
group who believe that one shouldn't try software that is not at least a few months
old, so that its teething issues are resolved, you should opt for the last-but-one
version. It's a good idea to opt for the latest stable version. The latest versions have
added quite a few very useful features, such as materialized views and an improved
set of JSON functions and operators.

We will use the following wget command to download the source:

wget http://ftp.postgresql.org/pub/source/v9.3.0/postgresql-
9.3.0.tar.gz

It's a good idea to opt for the latest stable version.

Executing this command will give us a window that looks like this:

[2]
 Chapter 1

As we can see, the tarred and gzipped source code comes to about 21 MB. As an
aside, the installation files of Oracle—the big RDBMS out here—weighs over 2.2 GB.

The files can be extracted using the following command:

tar -xvf postgresql-9.3.0.tar.gz

The tar command is used to create or extract TapeARchive files. In the preceding
command, the x option is used to extract, v for verbose is used so that we can see
the list of files and folders getting extracted, and the f option is for, well, passing
the name of the file, which will undergo the extraction process. We might need to
provide the z option, so the command will be tar -xzvf if the preceding code in the
tar command does not work. Some versions of tar are intelligent enough to figure
out whether it is a gzipped file or not and will unzip it automatically. The untarred
unzipped files come to around 115 MB.

Inspecting the contents

Let's inspect the contents:
cd postgresql-9.3.0

find ./ -maxdepth 1 -type d

The find command searches for files meeting specific criteria. Here, we instructed
find to limit itself to scanning just one level of subdirectories using maxdepth 1. We
used the type option along with d to tell find that we need files of type directory, as
shown in the following screenshot:

There are four directories:

• src: This directory has most of the core code, namely, code for the backend
processes, optimizer, storage, client utilities (such as psql) and code to
take care of replication, and so on. It also contains the makefiles for various
distributions. For example, we have the files Makefile.hpux, Makefile.
linux, Makefile.openbsd, and Makefile.sco under src/makefile.

[3]
Installing PostgreSQL

• doc: This directory has the source for documentation written in DocBook,
DocBook being an application of Standard Generalized Markup Language
(SGML). It's possible to generate documentation in an HTML format, PDF
format, and a few other formats.
• contrib: This directory is where many extensions are available. These
are add-on modules that do not form part of the core installation, but can
be installed as needed. For example, those who have to connect to other
PostgreSQL databases can install the Foreign Data Wrapper extension:
postgres_fdw. For those who want to access the contents of a file on the
server from a table, there is the file_fdw extension.
• config: This directory contains a few macros that help you configure and
compile the package.

Now let's move on to the dependencies, configuration options, and the actual
installation itself.

Dependencies to compile the source

To compile and build PostgreSQL from source, we need GNU Make Version 3.8 or
higher. The gmake -v command will tell us whether we have gmake and its version.

A compiler is also necessary. GNU Compiler Collection (GCC) is one such toolset
that is included in almost all the Unix systems. The gcc -v command will provide
you with the version of gcc as well as options with which it was configured on the
system, as shown in the following screenshot:

We can use the following commands to install the necessary packages if

they are missing:
• On Ubuntu: sudo apt-get install build-essential
• On RHEL/CentOS: sudo yum groupinstall 'Development
Tools'

[4]
 Chapter 1

The process of building a package from source involves preprocessing the source
(including the header files, expanding macros, and so on), compiling, assembly, and
linking (linking the libraries). The make utility automates the process of building the
executable from source code. The make command uses a makefile, which contains
rules on how to build the executables.

Other than GNU Make and a compiler, there is nothing else that is really necessary
to continue. However, it is better to have at least the following two components:

• readline: The GNU readline library is very useful once we start using
psql, the PostgreSQL command-line client, which is covered later. Having
readline helps us work in a very "bash-like" environment, using Tab
to autocomplete/suggest table names and up and down keys to browse
command history, and so on and so forth. It also helps to have zlib in
place before we proceed with the installation.
• zlib: This compression library can be handy when we are taking backups
(a process definitely to be followed when we have a database).

Adding SQL/XML support will also be useful as sooner or later we will want to
extract data from tables in an XML format or load data from the XML files to tables.
Still, this might not be as useful as the other two, namely, readline and zlib.

Configuring and creating the makefile

The next step is to execute configure. This is a shell script which will run, to quote
documentation, a number of tests to determine several system dependent variables.
It will also create many files that will be used during compilation. We can get an idea
about the options by executing the following command:
./configure --help > /tmp/config.txt

We can vi /tmp/config.txt and verify that there are over 80 options that can be
used. These options can be broadly grouped into the following categories:

• Related to choosing directories. If architecture-independent files go to /usr/

local/pgsql or elsewhere, where should the binaries go, where should the
documentation files go, and so on.
• Related to debugging, profiling, tracing, and so on to be used with care
in production.

[5]
Installing PostgreSQL

• Related to choosing nondefault settings for parameters such as blocksize,

port, and segment size. Changing default setting for parameters such as
blocksize can have significant impact on performance. So, we need to be
cautious here. Changing the default port is a good idea from a security
perspective. It can be changed later in the configuration file also.
• Related to enabling options, such as OpenSSL support, SELinux support,
and LDAP support.
• Related to building modules for several languages (Perl, Python, and
PL/TcL).
• Related to disabling a few features (such as zlib and readline).

Pay attention to the --prefix option. If you would like to

do a clean upgrade without causing disruption to the existing
environment, provide a directory in which the installation files
should be written to. This way, each version will be in a different
directory. For example:
./configure --prefix=/opt/pg/9.3

When we run ./configure, it's likely that we get an output like this:

The output tells us that readline is not available. However, if we list installation
packages, it is very much there. The reason is that readline-devel is missing. It
contains files needed by programs (such as psql) that use the readline library. This
can be installed using the following command:
yum install readline-devel.x86_64

[6]
 Chapter 1

It also installs ncurses-devel. You will have to execute the command using sudo
or root. You might also get a similar error for zlib, although zlib itself is already
installed. Again, the corrective action is to install devel, in this case, zlib-devel.

Once this is done, we can run configure again and it should go through without
any issues, as shown in the following screenshot:

The two files are now created in the current directory in addition to a few more files
in subdirectories. One is config.status and the other (config.log. config.
status) is a bash script that can be executed to recreate the configuration. The
config.log file can be reviewed to understand the various options used, variables,
and errors, if any. It's possible that the config.log file has a few errors that are
marked fatal, and the compilation process can still be completed without any issue.

[7]
Installing PostgreSQL

Building and creating the executables

This step compiles all the source files and generates the executables. The makefile
created in the configure step is used by the gmake utility. These files are not copied
to standard directories, such as bin, /usr/bin, /usr/local/bin, and so on. We
have the option to make all the options available (the contrib modules, source,
and so on), or just the core. It's also possible to build just the core now and add the
necessary contrib modules later on. We will build everything now, rather than
adding the necessary modules later. Hence, the command is:
gmake world

The process takes a few minutes to complete, and in the end says PostgreSQL,
contrib, and documentation successfully made. Ready to install, as
shown in the following screenshot:

[8]
Another Random Scribd Document
with Unrelated Content
asked to pass. In no other way, can we acquire our own knowledge
that the Supreme Court has yet to hear and consider the real
challenge to the supposed new Article in which governments attempt
to exercise ungranted power and to grant new power to interfere with
the individual freedom of the American citizen. As we well know, that
one real challenge is that the new Article was not made by those
who alone can make it, that it was not made as it can be
constitutionally made, by the makers of that kind of Article
named in the Fifth Article, the “conventions” of the Seventh and the
Fifth Articles, the “We, the people” of the Preamble and “the people”
of the Tenth Amendment.
 CHAPTER XXIII
THE CHALLENGES THAT FAILED

The validity of the Eighteenth Amendment (seven litigations being

heard together) was argued on March 8, 1920, and for several days
thereafter.
As we are not concerned with the meaning of the second section
of the Amendment or with the validity of the Volstead Act (passed by
Congress under the grant of said section) except as the validity of
the Act depends upon the validity of the Amendment, we shall make
no mention of either.
The Court announced its decision, in all the litigations, on June 7,
1920. Somewhat to the amazement of the country, but (in our
humble opinion even at the time) very wisely, the Court refused to
write any opinion whatever. Nothing could more certainly settle that
the Court determined no question except the specific questions
presented by those who challenged validity. That we may be certain
that the Court neither heard nor considered nor passed upon the real
and the invincible challenge to the existence of the supposed new
national Article, we will let the Court, in its own words, state exactly
just what were the four propositions, advanced against validity, and
state the simple fact that it negatived each of those four propositions.
Thus, in an impressive manner, we shall acquire our own knowledge
that the fifth conclusion, which later we shall state, is but the
conclusion of fact that nothing, in the four propositions negatived,
impairs the validity of the supposed Article.
Mr. Justice Van Devanter announced the conclusions of the
Court.
Power to amend the Constitution was reserved by Article V,
which reads:...
(As we have been in the conventions which made it, we know it.)
 The text of the Eighteenth Amendment, proposed by
Congress in 1917 and proclaimed as ratified in 1919, 40 Stat.
1050, 1941, is as follows:...
(The text of the first two sections is quoted on page 465 herein.)
We are here concerned with seven cases involving the
validity of that Amendment and of certain general features of
the National Prohibition Law, known as the Volstead Act, c.
83, 41 Stat. 305, which was adopted to enforce the
Amendment. The relief sought in each case is an injunction
against the execution of that act.... The cases have been
elaborately argued at the bar and in printed briefs; and the
arguments have been attentively considered, with the result
that we reach and announce the following conclusions on the
questions involved:
1. The adoption by both houses of Congress, each by a two
thirds vote, of a joint resolution proposing an amendment to
the Constitution sufficiently shows that the proposal was
deemed necessary by all who voted for it. An express
declaration that they regarded it as necessary is not essential.
None of the resolutions whereby prior amendments were
proposed contained such a declaration.
2. The two thirds vote in each house which is required in
proposing an amendment is a vote of two thirds of the
members present—assuming the presence of a quorum—and
not a vote of two thirds of the entire membership, present and
absent. Missouri Pacific Ry. Co. v. Kansas, 248 U. S. 276.
3. The referendum provisions of state constitutions and
statutes cannot be applied, consistently with the Constitution
of the United States, in the ratification or rejection of
amendments to it. Hawke v. Smith, ante, 221.
4. The prohibition of the manufacture, sale, transportation,
importation and exportation of intoxicating liquors for
beverage purposes, as embodied in the Eighteenth
Amendment, is within the power to amend reserved by Article
 V of the Constitution. (National Prohibition Cases, 253, U. S.
350, 384.)
We are not interested in the first two propositions which the Court
negatived. They were that the Congress resolution should have said
that two thirds of Congress deemed it necessary to propose the
Amendment and that the proposals should have been made by two
thirds of the entire membership of the House instead of two thirds of
a quorum in each House. These are trifling and unimportant matters
when over one hundred million Americans seek to learn when they
ceased to be citizens of America and became absolute “subjects” of
governments in America.
The third proposition negatived has naught to do with ourselves,
the citizens of America. It deals only with the rights of some state
citizens as such, where their state constitution has a referendum
provision. For our protection against usurpation by any government
of our own reserved rights or powers, we look to our own American
Constitution. We have lived through its making with the Americans
who made it to secure individual liberty of themselves and their
posterity, ourselves, the citizens of America.
The clear statement of simple fact, expressed in the Court’s fourth
conclusion, tells us something, which, with Madison, we have known
since he wrote and suggested his Fifth Article, at Philadelphia, on
September 10, 1787. Our stay in the “conventions,” which made the
Fifth Article, has taught us that the Americans in them, even Henry
and the opponents of the Constitution, were fully aware of the fact
that the Fifth Article provided the constitutional mode in which the
“conventions” could thereafter exercise the existing omnipotence of
the citizens of America themselves to make any kind of an Article of
government. The same stay fixed firmly in our minds that every one
in them knew that the Fifth Article is not a grant of any ability from
themselves to themselves, from the “conventions” named in the
Seventh Article to the same “conventions” named in the Fifth Article,
all being the “conventions” of the American citizens assembled to
exercise their own omnipotence.
 And so, coming from the only “conventions” of that kind yet held,
we grasp at once the absolute accuracy of the statement in the
fourth conclusion of the Court in 1920. The mention of the same
“conventions” in the Fifth Article, a mention made by the
“conventions” of the Seventh Article, is the sound basis for our
knowledge that, as the Tenth Amendment expressly declares, those
“conventions” of the Seventh expressly reserved to themselves (the
same “conventions” named in the Fifth, “the people” of America in
the Tenth Amendment) their own exclusive ability to make national
Articles, like the First Article and the Eighteenth Amendment. For
which reason, we know the truth of the Court statement in its fourth
conclusion, that the power to make the Eighteenth Amendment “is
within the power to amend reserved by Article V.” The exclusive
ability of the “conventions” of 1787 and 1788—to make the Article
which is that new Amendment—is something known to all who were
in those “conventions.” That the ability—to make Articles like the
First Article and the new Amendment—remained exclusively in such
“conventions” of the American citizens, because such Articles are
national and either directly interfere with or are the basis for direct
interference with individual freedom of the American citizen, was
also known to every one in those “conventions.” That is why the
Americans in those early “conventions” insisted that the Tenth
Amendment expressly declare that such exclusive ability was
reserved to them, “the people” of that Amendment, and why the
same “conventions” mentioned themselves, the “conventions,” in the
Fifth Article and provided therein the constitutional mode of
procedure in which that exclusive ability could thereafter be
exercised by those who had it, the “conventions” of the American
citizens.
Even though this knowledge, which we bring straight from the
“conventions” which made the Fifth Article, be not shared at all by
the lawyers of 1920, we are aware that it is also the knowledge of
the Supreme Court. That is why Marshall long ago pointed out that,
when individual welfare required that government should be granted
some national powers or powers to interfere with individual freedom,
“the necessity of deriving such powers from the people themselves
was felt and acknowledged by all.” That is why in 1907 the Supreme
Court again declared “the powers the people have given to the
General Government are named in the Constitution, and all not there
named, ... are reserved to the people and can be exercised only by
them, or upon further grant from them.” As the First Section of the
new Amendment is the exercise and the Second Section is the grant
of one of those reserved powers, and as the Fifth Article provides the
constitutional mode of procedure in which it can be exercised or
granted by those, who alone have it, “the people” of the Tenth
Amendment and the “conventions” of the Fifth Article, it is very
natural to read in the same Supreme Court, in the National
Prohibition Cases, that the ability to make the Eighteenth
Amendment “is within the power to amend reserved by Article V.”
When the Supreme Court of Marshall’s day knew that state
“legislatures” could not make Articles like the First Article and the
Eighteenth Amendment, when the Supreme Court of 1907 still knew
that only the “people” or “conventions” could make Articles of that
kind, when the Supreme Court of our own day knows that the Fifth
Article deals only with “reserved” power, we Americans feel that we
are to remain free men and citizens. We have come from the
“conventions” with our own accurate knowledge that the power to
make the new Amendment or any other Article like the First Article
“is within the power to amend reserved by Article V.” But, for the
very reason that our knowledge is accurate, we know that the power
to make such Articles was not reserved to the state legislatures, who
did not have it, but was reserved to the “conventions,” who did have
it and who were exercising it (in making the First Article) at the very
moment when they made the Fifth Article.
We have examined the four conclusions of the Supreme Court
which deal with any argument presented against the existence of the
Eighteenth Amendment. Those conclusions negative every such
argument that was presented. But, because every brief assumed
and asserted that the amending power “reserved” in the Fifth Article
had been “granted” therein, the four conclusions make clear that the
Court has yet to hear and pass upon the challenge which reads the
Eighteenth Amendment out of our Constitution. When that challenge
is presented by American lawyers, who know what American basic
law is and how American citizens are constitutionally protected
against usurpation of power by governments in America, there can
be no doubt of the decision of the Supreme Court. In that decision,
there will be no conclusion denying the most important legal fact in
America, namely, that governments cannot exercise ungranted
power or create new government power to interfere with the
individual freedom of the American citizen. In that decision, there will
be again the simple statement of the undoubted fact that the ability
to make the Eighteenth Amendment “is within the power to amend
reserved by Article V.” But, in that decision, there will be added the
plain statement of the Tenth Amendment that such ability was not
reserved to the state legislatures who never had it, but was reserved
to the “conventions,” who always had it and still have it. And,
comparing that future decision (which is certain to come from the
Supreme Court) with the decision, which merely negatived the four
unsound challenges which were made to the Eighteenth
Amendment, we know that the first five conclusions of the latter
decision—all the conclusions that have aught to do with the
existence and validity of the Eighteenth Amendment—merely hold
that the existence of the new Amendment is not affected by any of
these challenges which were made.
With exceeding wisdom in our humble opinion, the Court carefully
refrains from passing upon or determining any question except the
exact challenges which were presented. That is why no opinion was
written. When any general statement (seeming to bear upon
questions not presented or submitted) might come back to perplex
and annoy the Court in future litigation where protected liberty of the
American citizen was the challenge to the government-made new
Article, common sense and sound reason and the experience of
generations dictated that no general statement should be made.
And, as there was but one way to avoid a single general statement,
no opinion was written. This method of deciding those particular
litigations, with their four unsound challenges, would leave the
decision itself without even an apparent influence upon a litigation in
which some real challenge might be presented.
 And so we find the Court merely stating “that we reach and
announce the following conclusions on the questions involved.”
Nothing could make more clear that no conclusion is reached or
announced on any question not presented by those who urged
invalidity.
The first four conclusions reached and announced are conclusions
of law against the opposite legal conclusions urged by those
opponents. The fifth conclusion is a conclusion of fact that validity of
the Amendment is not affected by any of the four propositions
advanced by the opponents of the Amendment. In other words, the
first five numbered conclusions, all that deal with validity of the
Amendment, can be expressed in our own words, viz: “Although the
proposing Resolution did not state that Congress deemed the
proposal necessary, although only two thirds of a quorum in each
House (and not two thirds of the membership of each House) made
the proposal, although the citizens of each referendum state have
not acted as part of their respective state legislatures, and although it
is urged that the Fifth Article reserved abilities do not include ability
to make an Amendment like the Eighteenth, we decide that none of
these things affect the validity of the new Article.”
And, when we make this accurate statement of what was decided
in those National Prohibition Cases, we average Americans, fresh
from our education with the Americans who found themselves
“subjects” and made themselves and their posterity free men, have
some startling facts brought home to us.
Undoubtedly thousands of lawyers had worked, for more than a
year, in the preparation of the arguments that were made and the
briefs that were filed. When these amazingly important litigations
were reached, the arguments lasted for several days. On the
exhaustive briefs filed against validity, there appear twenty-two
lawyers, many of them among the leaders of the American Bar. On
the briefs to support state government omnipotence over the citizens
of America, “in all matters whatsoever,” thirty-five lawyers, headed by
a former member of the Supreme Court, appear.
 We know, with a knowledge that brooks no denial, because it is a
knowledge brought from our experience with those who made
themselves free men and established the Constitution to secure that
result to themselves and to us, that the new Article is not in the
Constitution unless at some time prior to 1917, the free men of
America, all the individual citizens of America, became the “subjects”
of some state governments.
It is clear, therefore, that the existence of the Eighteenth
Amendment has always depended upon the correct answer to the
question whether the American is “Citizen or Subject?”
If we are subjects, the new Article may be in the Constitution not
made by us but made by governments.
If we still are citizens, as once undoubtedly we were, the new
Article cannot be in our Constitution, because we have not made the
new Article, assembled in our “conventions.”
Where men are citizens, governments cannot exercise ungranted
power or create new power to interfere with individual liberty.
In a nation of free men, established by former “subjects” with a
dominant purpose that no American should ever be the “subject” of
any governments, it is amazing that one government should propose
that governments constitute, and it is amazing that forty-six
governments should attempt to constitute, new government of men
—new government power to interfere with individual human freedom.
But most amazing of all, in a nation with the history of America, is
the fact that, when audacious government had so proposed and
audacious governments had so attempted, the prolonged arguments
and voluminous briefs of fifty-seven leading members of the
American Bar never once knew or stated the simple fact which made
the proposal and the attempt a legal and constitutional absurdity.
The fact itself, the one most important legal fact in America, was
once known and “felt and acknowledged by all” Americans. Yet, not
once in any brief in the National Prohibition Cases, was it either
known or urged that the “conventions” of the Fifth Article are the
“conventions” of the Seventh Article and that both are the whole
American “people” of the Preamble and the Tenth Amendment and
that, therefore, the Constitution expressly reserves to the
“conventions” of the Fifth Article, the citizens of America, their
existing and exclusive ability to create new government power to
interfere with their own individual human liberty.
Why none of these briefs did make this challenge became known
to us when Rice of Rhode Island, with the silence of his colleagues
marking their approval, answered the Court that the new Article
could not be constitutionally made. Why they did not make the
challenge will be emphasized when we read the leading brief against
the new Amendment. Over fifty times it will admit and state that the
Fifth Article is a “grant” of power to state legislatures from American
citizens and claim the “granted” power is a limited power and does
not include ability to make an Amendment like the Eighteenth
because such Amendment takes away the reserved power of a state
or political entity. Then, to emphasize what it does not know about
the “conventions” of the Fifth Article and the reserved powers of the
citizens of America, this brief will go on to tell us that there is no
constitutional mode in which can be made an Article which takes
more power away from any state; that such an Article may only be
made, outside any constitutional mode, by having the people
themselves rescind “the social compact” which is their American
Constitution and having them make “such new compact as they
please”; but that such new compact, such new Article of that kind,
cannot “be validly and legally made to come to pass against the
objection and protest of any state.” All this clearly explains why none
of the briefers were able to answer correctly the question asked by
the Court. How could they tell the Court in what way the Eighteenth
Amendment could be constitutionally made, when all of them “knew”
that there was no constitutional mode in which the “conventions” of
the American citizens could make it, and when they “knew” that it
could not be made, even outside the Constitution, without the
consent of the citizens of every state? The most important words in
the Fifth Article, “in conventions in three fourths thereof,” did not
mean to these briefers what they meant to the Americans who made
the Fifth Article or to Madison and Hamilton who wrote the Fifth
Article and suggested it at Philadelphia. In the word “conventions,”
they did not recognize the Seventh Article “conventions” of the
American citizens describing themselves by exactly the same word,
“conventions,” in the Fifth Article. In the words “in three fourths
thereof” after the word “conventions,” they did not recognize the
great security to human freedom which we have learned with the
Americans who wrote and who made the Fifth Article. They did not
recognize how the American people, by these words, made it their
constitutional command that they themselves, again assembled in
their conventions, by a “Yes” from three fourths of their “conventions”
and without the consent of the Americans in the other “conventions,”
might withdraw any power granted in the First Article and might add
any new power to its enumerated grants, whenever they deemed
such withdrawal or such addition would better secure and protect
American individual liberty.
That not one of the briefers did make our challenge is our certain
knowledge when we read the four challenges they did make and
which are negatived in the first four conclusions of the Court.
The first two relate to the manner of the proposal that
governments create government of men in America. Who cares how
one government makes a silly proposal? The one important thing is
that no governments shall attempt to act upon a proposal which
denies the most important legal fact in America, that governments
cannot constitute new government ability to interfere with individual
liberty.
The fourth challenge that was made is the absurd challenge that
the Fifth Article does not mention a constitutional mode of
procedure in which the citizens of America may again directly grant
to their government new power to interfere with their own individual
liberty and in which—far more important to the “conventions” which
named themselves (the “conventions”) in their Fifth Article—the
American citizens can directly take back any part of the granted
power of the First Article which they find oppressive to their
individual liberty. This challenge neither knows nor makes any
distinction between the state “legislatures” and the “conventions” of
the American citizens or the mention of either in the Fifth Article. It is
a challenge which has not the knowledge we bring from the first
“conventions,” the knowledge that “legislatures” are mentioned on
account of their existing ability to make federal or declaratory Articles
and that “conventions” are mentioned on account of their exclusive
ability to make Articles of any kind. It is a challenge which assumes
and asserts and is based wholly upon the absurd assumption that
the Fifth Article is a “grant” of power to make Articles. On this absurd
assumption of this patently absurd “grant,” this fourth challenge,
frankly stated in our own words, is as follows: “In the Fifth Article, the
‘conventions’ grant to the two grantees—the grantors and the state
legislatures—an identical ability to make new Articles. We admit that,
if the ‘conventions’ of the Fifth Article could constitutionally make the
Eighteenth Amendment, the state legislatures can also
constitutionally make it. But our challenge is that the ‘grant,’ in the
Fifth Article, is limited in extent and that neither the ‘conventions’ nor
the state legislatures can constitutionally make the Eighteenth
Amendment.”
To the “constitutional” lawyers who make this challenge, to all who
support such challenge, we commend many hours’ study of the
statements of Madison, who wrote the Fifth Article; of Hamilton, who
supported its introduction at Philadelphia; of Wilson, Pendleton,
Henry, Iredell, MacLaine, Jarvis, Lee, Mason, and the many others,
with whom we have sat in the “conventions” which made the Fifth
Article. Particularly do we commend a careful reading of the
reasoning which led to the decision at Philadelphia, in 1787, that the
First Article, because it constituted government of men, must go to
the “conventions” named alike in the Seventh and the Fifth Articles
and could not be validly made by the state “legislatures” named in
the Fifth Article. That decision was based upon the unrepealed
Statute of 1776, a statute well understood in 1787, only eleven years
after the Statute itself had been enacted as the command of the
whole American people. Finally, to those who support this fourth
challenge, we commend a thorough reading of the law laid down by
Marshall in the Supreme Court. If they thus educate themselves as
we have educated ourselves, they will be able to say with Marshall:
“To the formation of a league, such as was the Confederation, the
state sovereignties were certainly competent. But when, ‘in order to
form a more perfect Union,’ it was deemed necessary to change this
alliance into an effective government possessing great and
sovereign power and acting directly on the people, the necessity of
referring it to the people and of deriving its power directly from them,
was felt and acknowledged by all.”
And, if all shall complete their education with such men as
Webster and Lincoln, they will never again make the mistake of
ignoring the vital and important distinction in identity between “state
legislatures” and “conventions” of the American citizens, the
distinction that the former are never anything but governments and
each the government agent of the citizens of one state, while the
“conventions” are the citizens of America itself assembled in
“conventions” to issue their commands to themselves, to their
government, to the states and to the state governments. The
completed education will enable these lawyers to win future litigation
against legislative governments who audaciously attempt to usurp
the exclusive and reserved powers of the “conventions” of the
American citizens.
In any of the three challenges negatived by the first, second and
fourth conclusions of the Supreme Court, we have failed to find any
suggestion of our challenge, namely, that state “legislatures” have
audaciously attempted to usurp the exclusive powers reserved to the
“conventions” which are named in the Fifth Article.
And now we examine the only other challenge that was made, a
challenge negatived by the third conclusion of the Supreme Court.
No challenge could more emphatically ignore the protected individual
liberty of the citizen of America. This challenge does not know that
American citizens have no government save the government of
enumerated powers. This challenge frankly admits that the Fifth
Article is a grant to legislatures, each elected by the citizens of some
particular state, and that three fourths of those legislatures have the
omnipotence, which was denied to the British Parliament, over every
individual liberty of the American citizen. Like the other challenges
that were made, like every brief for or against the Eighteenth
Amendment, this challenge knows not that the Constitution is both a
federal and a national Constitution and knows not that the state
“legislatures” never have and never can have aught to do with the
national aspect of that Constitution. Based on this remarkable
ignorance, this is the challenge, frankly stated in our own words:
“The state legislatures can make this Eighteenth Amendment. The
state governments can do what they will, so long as they call their
action a constitutional Amendment, with every reserved right and
power of the citizens of America. But thirty-six state legislatures are
necessary to make anything called a constitutional Amendment. And
our challenge is that thirty-six legislatures have not made this
particular Eighteenth Amendment. In any state, where the
referendum exists, the citizens of that state [we note that even now
the citizens of America are not mentioned] are part of the state
legislature. In some of these referendum states, whose legislatures
are included among your claimed thirty-six ratifiers for the Eighteenth
Amendment, the whole of the state legislature has not yet ratified,
because the citizens of the state, who are part of its legislature, have
not yet acted. For this reason, that you ignore the rights of the
citizens of some states, our challenge is that the Eighteenth
Amendment has not been ratified by the legislative governments of
thirty-six states.”
This particular challenge, like everything in these litigations and in
the whole history of the supposed new Amendment, brings into bold
relief the one monumental error at the bottom of every thought that
the new Amendment is in the Constitution, at the bottom of the
varied absurdities which constantly appear in every brief, either for or
against validity.
Without a single exception, the fifty-seven lawyers on these briefs
base their every argument, no matter how those arguments may
challenge one another, on the ridiculous sheer assumption that the
Fifth Article is a great power of attorney to the state governments
from the citizens of America. All these fifty-seven lawyers ignore the
undeniable fact—mentioned continually in the “conventions” of the
Seventh Article which wrote their own name, “conventions,” into the
Fifth Article—that the Constitution is both federal and national. This
first mistake, this ignoring of that fact, led all of them immediately into
the fatal error of wholly ignoring the vitally important fact that the
Fifth Article distinctly names those who already could make federal
Articles, the state governments, and those whose exclusive right it
always was and is to make national Articles, the people assembled
in their “conventions.” Only because of these two mistakes, the next
step comes in the guise of the absurd concept that the Fifth Article is
a grant of any power of attorney, from the citizens of America, either
to the “state legislatures” or the “conventions.” In this patent
absurdity, all fifty-seven lawyers concur. That each of them does not
see its patent absurdity is due entirely to the fact that not one of
them states the proposition, that the Fifth Article is a grant, in the
frankest mode of stating it. That frankest way is to state the
proposition in these words: “In the Fifth Article the citizens of
America, assembled in the ‘conventions’ of 1788, granted to the
state legislatures and to themselves, the citizens of America,
assembled in their ‘conventions,’ a quantum of power as attorneys in
fact of the citizens of America. We fifty-seven lawyers only differ as
to the extent of the power which the citizens of America grant to
themselves and to the state governments. We, who support the new
amendment, contend that the citizens of America grant to the state
governments and to the citizens of America all the power of the
citizens of America. On the other hand, we, who oppose validity,
contend that the citizens of America grant to the state governments
and to the citizens of America only some of the unlimited power of
the citizens of America, the very power they were exercising when
they made the grant which is the Fifth Article.”
When the common proposition of all those lawyers, that the Fifth
Article “grants” power to those two grantees, is stated in this frank
way, its patent absurdity is manifest. Every one of those lawyers
knows that a grantor never can or does grant to himself either all or
part of what he already has. Moreover, all those lawyers ought to
know that the Tenth Amendment expressly declares that the entire
Constitution, in which is the Fifth Article, grants no power of any kind
except to the American government at Washington. Alone and
unaided, this simple declaration makes it impossible that the Fifth
Article grants any power to the state governments. Thus, even
without the certain knowledge we bring from the conventions of
1788, the state governments disappear from the scene as attorneys
in fact for the citizens of America in any matter. Each of those state
governments is left with no power it did not have before the Fifth
Article was made. Not one of them even keeps all of the power
which it had before 1788. The citizens of America, the “conventions”
in which they assembled, commanded otherwise. “When the
American people created a national legislature, with certain
enumerated powers, it was neither necessary nor proper to define
the powers retained by the States. These powers proceed, not from
the people of America, [the “conventions” named in the Seventh and
the Fifth Articles] but from the people of the several states; and
remain, after the adoption of the Constitution, what they were before,
except so far as they may be abridged by that instrument.” So spoke
Marshall from the Supreme Court Bench, in 1819, after he had come
from one of those “conventions” in which he himself had stated: “It
could not be said that the states derived any powers from that
system, [the new Constitution then before the convention in Virginia]
but retained them, though not acknowledged in any part of it.” (3 Ell.
Deb. 421.)
Yet every brief of those fifty-seven lawyers bases its every
argument on the sheer assumption, asserted by all, that the Fifth
Article is a “grant” to the state legislatures which makes them
attorneys in fact for the citizens of America. No brief can offer and no
brief does offer the slightest proof in support of the assumption. But
no brief asks for proof of the assumption or challenges the
assumption. On the contrary, every brief makes the assumption and
asserts it and on it rests every argument.
Because of this monumental error, every brief for the Amendment
insists that the state legislatures, as attorneys in fact for the citizens
of America with every power of the citizens of America, validly made
the Eighteenth Amendment.
Because of this monumental error, every brief against the
Amendment asserts that the state legislatures are attorneys in fact
for the citizens of America but insists that the Fifth Article (the
assumed power of attorney in a Constitution which expressly
declares that no power is given to the state legislatures) grants to the
state legislatures (as well as to the “grantors” themselves) only
limited ability on behalf of the principal, the citizens of America. On
this altogether unique argument, it is contended that the limited
power of attorney does not confer ability to make an Amendment like
the Eighteenth.
Because all briefs make the same monumental error, there is no
challenge on the ground that the state legislatures, not a member of
which is elected by the citizens of America, hold no power of
attorney from the citizens of America to interfere in any way, in any
matter, with the individual freedom of the American citizens. Because
all briefs against the Amendment make the same monumental error,
the fourth challenge (which was made and considered by the Court)
is based upon the heretical doctrine—the heresy being clear from
what we have heard in the “conventions” where we sat—that the
Fifth Article does not mention a constitutional mode in which the
citizens of America, again assembled in their “conventions,” can take
back from their American government any enumerated power of the
First Article which they find oppressive to their individual rights and
freedom. And, perhaps most amazing and amusing fact of all,
because all briefs make the same monumental error, the briefs for
the Amendment make no effort to support and the briefs against the
Amendment make no attempt to challenge the clear paradox, on
which the Eighteenth Amendment depends for its existence, that
there never has been a citizen of America if it be true that the Fifth
Article makes the state governments the attorneys in fact for the
citizens of America with unlimited ability to interfere with the
individual freedom of the citizens of America. Where such unlimited
ability is in government, men are not “citizens” but “subjects.”
But we ourselves come from the “conventions” where the
Americans knew that they entered as free men and left as citizens of
America, not as “subjects” of any governments. Therefore, we need
no lawyer to tell us—and no lawyer can deny our knowledge—that, if
the state governments are the attorneys in fact for the American
citizens and have ability either to interfere with or to grant power to
interfere with the individual liberty of the American citizens, or, if any
governments can interfere with that liberty on a matter not
enumerated in the First Article, there never were American citizens
and the early Americans entered their “conventions” free men but left
those “conventions” as “subjects” of an omnipotent government.
 CHAPTER XXIV
GOVERNMENTS CLAIM AMERICANS AS
SUBJECTS

“Is the government of Virginia a state government after this

government is adopted? I grant that it is a republican government,
but for what purposes? For such trivial domestic considerations as
render it unworthy the name of a legislature.” (3 Ell. Deb. 171.) So
thundered Patrick Henry to the Americans assembled in convention
in Virginia, while these Americans still heard the echo of his charge
that the new Constitution made the state legislatures “weak,
enervated and defenseless governments.”
But these are the governments which all lawyers of 1920 “knew”
had been made the attorneys in fact for the citizens of America,
possessors of the supreme will in America. These are the
governments to which all advocates of the Eighteenth Amendment
contend that the Americans, in the “conventions” with Henry, gave
the entire omnipotence of the American people to be exercised by
these governments, without any constitutional restraint.
The real fact is, although all lawyers of 1920 failed to know the
fact, that these state governments were only named in the Fifth
Article, because they already had an existing limited ability to make
federal Articles, an ability not granted by the citizens of America but
possessed by each of those governments as attorney in fact for the
citizens of its own state. That it was an ability not granted by the
citizens of America, must be apparent when we recall that it was
exercised by those governments in 1781—seven years before there
was such a thing as a citizen of America. That the lawyers of 1920
neither knew nor realized the importance of this fact, is apparent
when we recall that every brief of those lawyers asserted that these
governments get their ability to make Articles by a “grant” in the Fifth
Article.
Our knowledge of the nature of every challenge to the new
Amendment, and our knowledge that each challenge involved the
assumption that the Fifth Article was a “grant” to these state
governments, is a knowledge which is certain from our study of the
conclusions of the Supreme Court which negatived each challenge.
The certainty is emphasized by our memory of the reply of Rice in
that Supreme Court, when, without one dissent from the challengers,
he stated his and their conviction that the “conventions” of 1788—the
challengers all forgetting that those “conventions” named themselves
in the Fifth Article—provided no constitutional mode of procedure
in which their own exclusive power could be again exercised to make
Articles like the First Article and the Eighteenth Amendment.
Let us again emphasize our certainty by a few moments with the
briefs of the challengers.
Root was their leader. A distinguished public leader and
considered by many to be the leader of the American Bar, there was
special reason why he should have known the ability of government
to make national Articles in a Constitution, only when men are
“subjects,” and the inability of governments to make such Articles,
when men are “citizens.”
If his brief, or the brief of any challenger, had urged this real and
invincible challenge, we would have found the mention of that
challenge in the decision and it would not have been a refutation of
that challenge. That we may confirm our knowledge that the brief of
Root, like the brief of every challenger, did not make this challenge,
the challenge that the Fifth Article is no “grant” but a mention of two
existing abilities and a mode of constitutional procedure for the
respective exercise of each, let us read the brief’s own statements of
the three challenges it does make. “The plaintiff contends that this
attempted amendment to the Constitution of the United States is
invalid (1) because it constitutes mere legislation, and is, therefore,
not authorized by Article V of the Constitution, (2) because it impairs
the reserved police or governmental powers of the several States
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

textbookfull.com