Priem, Alexander said:
Would lc-collate=C be bad in combination with UNICODE encoding? What
lc-collate setting would you recommend for UNICODE encoding which will
provide good sorting for all (most) common languages? (dutch, english,
french, german)
It seems that LC_COLLATE=C is not a good
pgpool 1.0, yet another open source replication software for
PostgreSQL is now available at:
ftp://ftp.sra.co.jp/pub/cmd/postgres/pgpool/pgpool-1.0.tar.gz
pgpool is a single master/query based/synchronous replication
server. It acts as a proxy server between PostgreSQL client and
PostgreSQL
Is there a way to set up collation order to be case-insensitive?
I.E. I need to have a column c with value 'ABC' and when I do a select
* from table where c = 'abc' it finds the row with value 'ABC'. Yes, I
know that I can do it with lower() and upper() functions, but is
there a way to
Am Donnerstag, 22. April 2004 16:37 schrieb Priem, Alexander:
But if you use anything other than C, you can't use indexes in
Like-clauses, right?
No, see http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.4/static/indexes-opclass.html.
Would lc-collate=C be bad in combination with UNICODE encoding? What
Is it possible to to the following
I have tables which are updated via webpage (perl) with fields of type
int and date (all nullable). If the values are blank the entire insert
fails, with a wrong type error.
Is there any way to stop this behaviour so that the valid information is
allowed,but
Maybe you can do something with this function:
[quote from the postgres docs]
9.12.2. COALESCE
COALESCE(value [, ...])
The COALESCE function returns the first of its arguments that is not null. Null is
returned only if all arguments are null. This is often useful to substitute a default
value
On 23/04/2004 11:36 mike wrote:
Is it possible to to the following
I have tables which are updated via webpage (perl) with fields of type
int and date (all nullable). If the values are blank the entire insert
fails, with a wrong type error.
Is there any way to stop this behaviour so that the
On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 13:07:43 +0200,
Stijn Vanroye [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe you can do something with this function:
[quote from the postgres docs]
9.12.2. COALESCE
COALESCE(value [, ...])
That's the inverse of what he would want if he used that approach. NULLIF
is what turns
Dear All,
I have a database which stores traffic data and to update the traffic
for the particular IP i have to select this ip from the table for this
period and if it is already in the database i should run an update
statement, but if it is not presented - i should insert the data. It was
OK
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 13:07:43 +0200,
Stijn Vanroye [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe you can do something with this function:
[quote from the postgres docs]
9.12.2. COALESCE
COALESCE(value [, ...])
That's the inverse of what he would want if he used that
On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 11:36:51 +0100,
mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it possible to to the following
I have tables which are updated via webpage (perl) with fields of type
int and date (all nullable). If the values are blank the entire insert
fails, with a wrong type error.
Is
On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 17:48:21 +0400,
Anton Nikiforov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know that this will be helpful to write a function that will do this
for me, but it will run the same time as my insertion tool that is
written in c or even slower. So my question is: is it possible to have
Hi,
I need to synchronize some tables from a database (master) to another
one (slave).
Both servers are running Debian Woody with PostgreSQL 7.2.1 (postgresql
7.2.1-2woody4).
The databases are in unicode and doesn't contain any binary data.
The tables have primary/foreign key constraints,
How is it possible for Postgresql to freak out and take out the
machine?
How easy/likely is it for a program run as a normal user to
blue screen an MS server?
How easy/likely is it for a program run as a normal user to
do the equiv to
a FreeBSD/Linux server?
With *decent drivers*
Pascal Polleunus wrote:
Hi,
I need to synchronize some tables from a database (master) to another
one (slave).
Both servers are running Debian Woody with PostgreSQL 7.2.1 (postgresql
7.2.1-2woody4).
The databases are in unicode and doesn't contain any binary data.
The tables have
What do you need to do more of, inserts or updates? If the answer is
updates, just do an update and then check for the number of rows affected.
If it is 0, follow it with an insert, if not, you are done.
You could do this in a stored procedure to save you the round trip of data
between the DB and
At 06:13 PM 4/23/2004 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
MS built-in task manager doesn't let you kill all processes.
It will let you kill any processes at your own level of permissions,
just as Unix will. The difference is that a local admin on the machine
is not equal to root, and can still not
On Friday 23 April 2004 17:53, Bas Scheffers wrote:
What do you need to do more of, inserts or updates? If the answer is
updates, just do an update and then check for the number of rows affected.
If it is 0, follow it with an insert, if not, you are done.
You could do this in a stored
Bruno Wolff III [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This was discussed on the list over the last couple of days.
There is no update or insert statement in postgres.
You can do an update and check the number of rows affected and if it
is 0 do the insert.
I prefer to do the insert and if it fails due
On Friday 23 April 2004 20:41, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
I suspect most of the people doing this have something wrong with their
design in the first place.
Not really.
Here's a simple example. I have a set of mailboxes and I needed to implement a
gui widget to assign/remove them to/from a
On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 20:17:10 +0300,
Igor Shevchenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This workaround is ok but it requires additional programming instead of a
simple single query. Absence of this sort of thing moves some of naturally
database-side logic off to the application, and this sounds
stats=# select 1*10, 1*10::bigint;
?column? |?column?
+
1316134912 | 10
(1 row)
Shouldn't the first expression throw an error instead of doing whatever
it's actually doing? This is the sort of thing I like to bash mysql
On Saturday 24 April 2004 00:09, you wrote:
And in the proper way to do this in a relational database, those rows
are locked by the application until the user presses the OK button.
This kind of change is very rare and is usually done by admin user. There's
no need to lock those rows between
23 matches
Mail list logo
