Hi
I'm experimenting with PostgreSQL 8.3.0 on Windows connecting via ODBC. One
curiosity so far is this:
If I use pgAdmin and run SELECT catalog_name FROM Information_Schema.Schemata
I get data back as expected.
If I connect via ODBC and issue the same query I don't see any data. SQLFetch()
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If I use pgAdmin and run SELECT catalog_name FROM
Information_Schema.Schemata I get data back as expected.
If I connect via ODBC and issue the same query I don't see any data.
What userid are you connecting as under ODBC? Has it got privileges to
I wrote:
What userid are you connecting as under ODBC? Has it got privileges to
any of the schemas? The information_schema views generally hide objects
that you have no privileges for ...
In fact, looking closer, it looks like the schemata view only shows you
schemas that you are the *owner*
IN the second SQL, I meant this:
WHERE modify_date '2008-01-01'
On 16/02/2008, Phoenix Kiula [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a table with an index on a field called modify_date.
This works well if I have SQL which ends in
WHERE modify_date = '2008-01-01'
But if I try this
On Feb 15, 2008, at 18:11 , Ken Johanson wrote:
Tom, is it accurate to assume that newer PG versions will further
tighten type-strictness (say, '2008-01-01' presently being
comparable to a datetime)? Also, do you know of any other vendors
that are heading in this direction (removing by
I have a table with an index on a field called modify_date.
This works well if I have SQL which ends in
WHERE modify_date = '2008-01-01'
But if I try this condition:
WHERE modify_date = '2008-01-01'
THis index is not used. The EXPLAIN tells me it needs to do a seq
scan. Why is this?
Michael Glaesemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
test=# select '2008-02-15' CURRENT_DATE;
Here, we're comparing against a date type, so Postgres treats
'2008-02-15' as a date.
It might be worth pointing out that this is not magic,
but an application of the general rule mentioned at step 2a
Tom Lane wrote:
Hm, good point, so really we ought to have a separate casting path for
numeric types to char(n). However, this section still doesn't offer
any support for the OP's desire to auto-size the result; it says
that you get an error if the result doesn't fit in the declared
length:
Ken Johanson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Hm, good point, so really we ought to have a separate casting path for
numeric types to char(n). However, this section still doesn't offer
any support for the OP's desire to auto-size the result; it says
that you get an error if the
This table is vacuumed and analyzed every hour, so yes, it's been
analyzed recently.
These are the EXPLAIN ANALYZE outputs for both the equality condition
and the greater than condition:
orguser=# explain analyze select alias from clientswhere modify_date =
'2008-01-01' ;
Hi
My porting experiment has encountered the SQL Server UniqueIdentifier problem.
I can see one or two suggestions about this have been made over the years but
I'd like to try and stay close to the original. So:
I'm wondering if I can use a combination of a domain 'hack' for syntatic
Michael Glaesemann wrote:
On Feb 15, 2008, at 18:11 , Ken Johanson wrote:
Tom, is it accurate to assume that newer PG versions will further
tighten type-strictness (say, '2008-01-01' presently being comparable
to a datetime)? Also, do you know of any other vendors that are
heading in this
Michael Glaesemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The planner will choose a seq scan if it thinks that it will be
faster than using an index: if based on its statistics it thinks a
large portion of rows will match the criteria, a seq scan may well be
faster than an index scan.
Have you
On Feb 16, 2008, at 9:42 , Phoenix Kiula wrote:
The EXPLAIN tells me it needs to do a seq
scan. Why is this? How can I make a date/time field index which uses
both equality criteria and the greater than/lesser than/between
criteria?
The planner will choose a seq scan if it thinks that it
Phoenix Kiula [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
orguser=# explain analyze select alias from clientswhere modify_date
'2008-01-01' ;
QUERY PLAN
Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 12 Feb 2008, Tom Lane wrote:
Also, section 6.10 cast specification defines an explicit cast to
a fixed-length string type as truncating or padding to the target
length (LTD):
Are you sure that's the correct section to be using? Isn't that 6.10
Tom Lane wrote:
Ken Johanson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
select 5'6' - true
select 5'6' - false
select 15'60' - true
select 15'60' - false
These examples miss the point, because they'd give the same answer
whether you think the values are text or integer. Consider instead
these cases:
HI all,
The news/NNTP feed to these mailing lists does not seem to be working.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Ken Johanson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
select 5'6' - true
select 5'6' - false
select 15'60' - true
select 15'60' - false
These examples miss the point, because they'd give the same answer
whether you think the values are text or integer. Consider instead
these cases:
regression=# select 7
Why would I want to purchase a replica from Prestige Replicas?
There may be many reasons:
a) You want a genuine Rolex / Breitling watch, but the price is too ridiculous
b) You want to impress your friends or business clients
c) You want to keep your original safe, while using the replica for
On Sat, 16 Feb 2008, Tom Lane wrote:
Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 12 Feb 2008, Tom Lane wrote:
Also, section 6.10 cast specification defines an explicit cast to
a fixed-length string type as truncating or padding to the target
length (LTD):
Are you sure that's the
On 17/02/2008, Andrej Ricnik-Bay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 16/02/2008, Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
top -bc | tee topdata
That will save everything to a file called topdata while also letting you
watch it scroll by. Not as easy to catch the bad periods that way, the
output is
On 17/02/2008, Shashank Tripathi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 17/02/2008, Andrej Ricnik-Bay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 17/02/2008, Phoenix Kiula [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
~ top -b -d 1 | awk -f top.awk | tee topdata
awk: top.awk:24: for(i=8;ilast;i++
awk: top.awk:24:
On 17/02/2008, Phoenix Kiula [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But this is kind of sitting there, hogging the command prompt. Is
there any way I can let it go on in the background?
Ouch ... no, that's entirely my fault, wasn't quite awake I
guess, and hadn't thought it through completely ... that's
not
On Sat, 16 Feb 2008, Ken Johanson wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Hm, good point, so really we ought to have a separate casting path for
numeric types to char(n). However, this section still doesn't offer
any support for the OP's desire to auto-size the result; it says
that you get an error if
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Dave Page wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 4:21 PM, Tony Caduto
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
paul rivers wrote:
Going from 8.2.4 and 8.2.6 to 8.3.0 has been painless for me.
However, unlike the blogger you cite, I read the directions before,
not after,
Ubence Quevedo wrote:
What would the command be to have a query result be put into a
location/space sensitive file [position 1 through 5 would be one thing
where position 6 through 10 would be the next field, 11 through 16
another, etc]? Is this even possible with Postgres?
Not
On Feb 16, 2008 5:29 PM, Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ubence Quevedo wrote:
What would the command be to have a query result be put into a
location/space sensitive file [position 1 through 5 would be one thing
where position 6 through 10 would be the next field, 11 through 16
Scott, you are exactly right. I am looking to take various data in
multiple tables and create an output file delimited into specific
sections. I'll look more into the proper usage of select into as well
as the substring/field example you have given below.
Thanx!
On Feb 16, 2008, at
On Feb 16, 2008 7:19 PM, Ubence Quevedo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Scott, you are exactly right. I am looking to take various data in
multiple tables and create an output file delimited into specific
sections. I'll look more into the proper usage of select into as well
as the substring/field
Ken Johanson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
These examples miss the point, because they'd give the same answer
whether you think the values are text or integer. ...
Agreed, so should we disallow 7 '08'?
Maybe, but the usability ramifications would be enormous --- you'd
also be
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Ubence Quevedo wrote:
What would the command be to have a query result be put into a location/space
sensitive file [position 1 through 5 would be one thing where position 6
through 10 would be the next field, 11 through 16 another, etc]? Is this
even possible with
32 matches
Mail list logo
