Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
real_psql --set AUTOCOMMIT=OFF $@
I have stumbled over this myself: psql is case-sensitive here at the moment,
so it must be --set AUTOCOMMIT=off.
Best Regards,
Michael
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 8: explain analyze
We are currently
switching to stored procedures for a lot of our database activity. The question
has come up about the transactional nature of the stored procedures. I was
wondering if stored procedures can have transactions in themor if you must start the
transaction in your code and call
On Tue, Sep 21, 2004 at 07:41:31AM -0400, Kent Anderson wrote:
We are currently switching to stored procedures for a lot of our database
activity. The question has come up about the transactional nature of the
stored procedures. I was wondering if stored procedures can have
transactions in
Hi,
I have been having this problem where the database size suddenly grows
from the normal size of about 300Mb to 12Gb in one night.
When I look up the table size, the biggest one is only 41Mb and the
total of all table size is only 223Mb.
But in the filesystem data directory the total size is
Reynard Hilman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But in the filesystem data directory the total size is 12Gb. I noticed
there are 10 files with 1Gb size each:
1.1G25677563
1.1G25677563.1
...
I'm just wondering is there a way to know what that 25677563 file is?
select relname from
Reynard Hilman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
I have been having this problem where the database size suddenly grows
from the normal size of about 300Mb to 12Gb in one night.
When I look up the table size, the biggest one is only 41Mb and the
total of all table size is only 223Mb.
But in
On Tue, Sep 21, 2004 at 09:51:15AM -0500, Reynard Hilman wrote:
I'm just wondering is there a way to know what that 25677563 file is?
Why does postgres create a copy of that file with .1, .2, .3, etc.
Those are not copies. Postgres splits each relation (table/index) in 1GB
files. So the
Is that file still in used (because I can't find it in the pg_class
table)?
Yes. Don't delete it manually.
Thanks for that advice :) I wasn't really going to delete it, just
tempted to.
following Tom's advice, this query:
select relname from pg_class where relfilenode = 25677563;
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
which does not exist; in fact archives.postgresql.org has hardly
anything for that whole month of pgsql-sql. Marc, any idea what's wrong
there? The data was obviously there last time Oleg trolled for it.
Oh, and btw, archives.postgresql.org search doesn't
Trying to build a gist index on a column in a table.
The table contains 100k rows.
The column is an integer[]. Each row contains about 20-30 distinct values
chosen between 1 and 437.
Aim : search the arrays with the gist integer array operators @ etc.
Creating the index with gist__int_ops
Reynard Hilman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
following Tom's advice, this query:
select relname from pg_class where relfilenode = 25677563;
returns pg_toast_25677561 which is the record in pg_class that has the biggest
relpages, so that makes sense.
Okay, so you have a lot of wide (toasted)
Hi All,
I would appreciate any input on this dilemma:
I have DataBase-A which is Oracle on Server A with FunctionA
(PLSQL)
I have DataBase-B which is Postgress on Server B with FunctionB
(PgSQL)
I need to call FunctionA from FunctionB
I dont mind rewriting PgSQL
Shah, Sameer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1. I have DataBase-A which is Oracle on Server A with FunctionA
(PLSQL)
2. I have DataBase-B which is Postgress on Server B with FunctionB
(PgSQL)
3. I need to call FunctionA from FunctionB
As far as I know, the on'y way to do
Doug McNaught [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Shah, Sameer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1. I have DataBase-A which is Oracle on Server A with FunctionA
(PLSQL)
2. I have DataBase-B which is Postgress on Server B with FunctionB
(PgSQL)
3. I need to call FunctionA
Okay, so you have a lot of wide (toasted) fields in whatever table that
toast table belongs to --- if you're not sure, try
select relname from pg_class where
reltoastrelid = (select oid from pg_class where relfilenode = 25677563);
VACUUM VERBOSE on that table would give some useful info.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2004 at 11:11:33AM -0700, Chris Travers wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
There's only one transaction (whether it's an explicit transaction block
or an implicit one), and the query that invokes the stored procedure is
already running inside it. So the stored procedure always has
Hello list,
is there a way to write in plpgsql the query that returns a set of this:
create view xxx as
(select '3ARR' as level,
dpe_stamp from detpa
where dpe_productfk=1
order by 2 desc limit 1)
union all
(select '2CAM' as level,
dpe_stamp from detpc
where dpe_productfk=1
order by 2 desc limit
Has anyone investigated having either high, or low urgency queries? A
system I'm working on has a constant inflow of data, which has some
queries gainst it which might require long sequential scans. I'm not
that worried about how long those queries take, just that they don't
interfere with other
I am pretty sure the answer is no, but ... is there any way to get
'ilike' to use an index? It seems like something that a lot of people
would want to do. Otherwise, should I just create redundant
case-mapped columns and use 'like'?
Thanks,
Kevin Murphy
---(end of
You can use an index on an expression like lower( col ) LIKE ... as
long as the LIKE expression is left-anchored. See
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.4/static/indexes-expressional.html
-tfo
On Sep 21, 2004, at 1:16 PM, Kevin Murphy wrote:
I am pretty sure the answer is no, but ... is there any
On Tue, Sep 21, 2004 at 04:24:21PM -0400, Christopher Petrilli wrote:
Has anyone investigated having either high, or low urgency queries? A
system I'm working on has a constant inflow of data, which has some
queries gainst it which might require long sequential scans. I'm not
that worried
On Sep 21, 2004, at 4:52 PM, Thomas F.O'Connell wrote:
You can use an index on an expression like lower( col ) LIKE ... as
long as the LIKE expression is left-anchored. See
Yes, I know that already. I wasn't talking about LIKE; I was talking
about ILIKE. The data in the column is mixed-case.
So the answer is that ILIKE will not use indexes.
But using lower()/LIKE will give you exactly the same results. lower()
forces all column data to lower case for the purposes of comparison.
-tfo
On Sep 21, 2004, at 4:07 PM, Kevin Murphy wrote:
On Sep 21, 2004, at 4:52 PM, Thomas F.O'Connell
I'm trying to unsuccessfully to drop a database using the latest
CVS code for 8.0.0, getting the following error:
ERROR: cannot drop the currently open database
So I must have a connection open, right? So I look for
connections with the command I use on 7.3.4 but see nothing:
SELECT
On Tuesday September 21 2004 4:01, Ed L. wrote:
I'm trying to unsuccessfully to drop a database using the latest
CVS code for 8.0.0, getting the following error:
Duh. Operator error.
Ed
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe
I just read release notes for 7.4 where it said:( in plpgsql)
allows declaration of record type without %ROWTYPE
So, before that, there was no way to have a record returned of arbitrary
fields from a User Defined Function?
---(end of
I'm having difficulty getting postgresql to log queries.
I have the following set in my postgresql.conf:
---
# - Syslog -
syslog = 2 # range 0-2; 0=stdout; 1=both; 2=syslog
syslog_facility = 'LOCAL0'
syslog_ident = 'postgres'
log_statement = yes
I'm a brand new PostgreSQL user -- just started today (though I've
used MySQL for years).
Should I just start learning with version 8, since I'm sure I won't
launch any real live public projects with PostgreSQL for another few
months?
Any estimate when 8.0.0 will be final production-ready?
Miles Keaton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm a brand new PostgreSQL user -- just started today (though I've
used MySQL for years).
Should I just start learning with version 8, since I'm sure I won't
launch any real live public projects with PostgreSQL for another few
months?
Sure. 8.0 is
29 matches
Mail list logo
