Jonathon Suggs wrote, On 10-12-08 20:12:
I'm asking this as a more general question on which will perform
better. I'm trying to get a set of comments and their score/rankings
from two tables.
*comments*
cid (integer, primary key)
title
body
*comment_ratings*
cid (integer, primary key)
uid
Kevin Galligan wrote, On 29-10-08 23:35:
An example of a slow query is...
select count(*) from bigdatatable where age between 22 and 40 and state
= 'NY';
explain analyze returned the following...
Aggregate (cost=5179639.55..5179639.56 rows=1 width=0) (actual
time=389529.895..389529.897
Gregory Stark wrote, On 01-11-08 14:02:
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But sorry I still can't get WHY compression as a whole and data
integrity are mutually exclusive.
...
[snip performance theory]
Postgres *guarantees* that as long as everything else works correctly it
Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote, On 30-10-08 12:13:
it should, every book on encryption says, that if you compress your data
before encryption - its better.
Those books also should mention that you should leave this subject to
experts and have numerous examples on systems that follow the book,
Matthew Pulis wrote:
Hi,
I need to perform some timed testing, thus need to make sure that disk
cache does not affect me. Is clearing the OS (Ubuntu) disk cache, ( by
running: sudo echo 3 | sudo tee /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches ) enough to
do this? If not can you please point me to some site
Markus Wanner wrote:
Hi,
I'm running several productive servers on Debian etch (stable) with
Postgres 8.2 which has been in lenny (testing) and made available for
etch through the backports project [1]. Unfortunately, they
discontinued maintaining 8.2 and switched to 8.3 in testing and thus
Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 1:10 PM, Martin Gainty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
accessing:
i *thought* the advantage of creating any SQL procedure/function was the
entity is stored in procedure cache
load time:
Java vs C++ compare here
it working optimally? I.e. would my method work or are there any better
solutions possible?
How can I write the filtering functions in such a manner that I can
later transform the solution in a trigger based one?
Regards,
- Joris Dobbelsteen
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo wrote, On 25-Aug-2008 18:48:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:07:23 -0400
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you're feeling corageous, you can remove the pg_depend
entries for that sequence.
Richard Huxton wrote, On 15-Jul-2008 15:19:
Sergey Konoplev wrote:
Yes it is. But it the way to break integrity cos rows from table2
still refer to deleted rows from table1. So it conflicts with
ideology isn't it?
Yes, but I'm not sure you could have a sensible behaviour-modifying
BEFORE
Peter wrote:
I have two immutable Pl/PG funcs - func A takes a parameter X, looks up
related value Y from a table and passes Y to func B. Now, if I do something
like
select A(field_x) from bigtable
it will, of course call A for every single row since paramater is changing.
However, it also
Henrik wrote:
Hi list,
I'm having a table with a lots of file names in it. (Aprox 3 million) in
a 8.3.1 db.
Doing this simple query shows that the statistics is way of but I can
get them right even when I raise the statistics to 1000.
db=# alter table tbl_file alter file_name set
David Wilson wrote:
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Joris Dobbelsteen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you want to clean up the the staging table I have some concerns about
the advisory lock. I think you mean exclusive table lock.
Either works, really. An advisory lock is really just a lock over
David Wilson wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 9:52 AM, Joris Dobbelsteen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Describe the mechanism, because I don't really believe it yet. I think you
need to do a advisory lock around every commit of every transaction that
writes to the log table.
Consider some number
Gurjeet Singh wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:29 AM, David Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Joris Dobbelsteen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Ah, yes, all visible rows...
My point
Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:44:51PM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
It won't work with multiple concurrent writers. There is no guarantee
that an INSERT with a timestamp older than the one you just saw isn't
waiting to commit.
This is pretty unlikely -- I won't say
Craig Ringer wrote:
[snip]
If you really want to make somebody cry, I guess you could do it with
dblink - connect back to your own database from dblink and use a short
transaction to commit a log record, using table-based (rather than
sequence) ID generation to ensure that records were
David Wilson wrote:
(I originally missed replying to all here; sorry about the duplicate,
Vance, but figured others might be interested.
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Vance Maverick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Another approach would be to queue the log entries in a staging table,
so that a
Ross Boylan wrote:
I have a postgres server for which du reports
1188072 /var/lib/postgresql/8.2/main
on Linux system.
The server has only one real database, which is for bacula. When I dump
the database, it's 73Mg.
This is immediately after I did a full vacuum and restarted the server.
Ross Boylan wrote:
On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 20:27 +0200, Joris Dobbelsteen wrote:
Ross Boylan wrote:
I have a postgres server for which du reports
1188072 /var/lib/postgresql/8.2/main
on Linux system.
The server has only one real database, which is for bacula. When I dump
the database
-Original Message-
From: Ross Boylan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, 30 March 2008 23:43
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] database 1.2G, pg_dump 73M?!
On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 21:22 +0200, Joris Dobbelsteen wrote
-Original Message-
From: Ross Boylan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, 31 March 2008 0:23
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: RE: [GENERAL] database 1.2G, pg_dump 73M?!
On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 22:59 +0100, Joris Dobbelsteen wrote
Leon Mergen wrote:
On 3/19/08, Erik Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Excuse me for bumping this up again, but I still don't understand how
to use this approach to sequentially walk through all different child
tables in one select, without having to JOIN these tables all the
time
wstrzalka wrote:
Hi
Features like CREATE DATABASE WITH TEMPLATE or CREATE TABLE LIKE
are very usefull but it would be great to have such a feature on the
mid-level too. I mean something CREATE SCHEMA LIKE that would copy all
the template schema relations, etc...
What do you think about it ?
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, 5 March 2008 0:29
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Cc: Gregory Stark; Scott Marlowe; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Planner: rows=1 after similar to
where condition.
Joris Dobbelsteen [EMAIL
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joris
Dobbelsteen
Sent: Monday, 25 February 2008 17:08
To: Tom Lane
Cc: Gregory Stark; Scott Marlowe; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Planner: rows=1 after similar to
where condition
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gevik
Babakhani
Sent: Tuesday, 26 February 2008 22:30
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] win32: how to backup (dump does not work)
AFAIK stopping the server,
-Original Message-
From: Scott Marlowe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, 25 February 2008 7:14
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Planner: rows=1 after similar to
where condition.
On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Joris Dobbelsteen
[EMAIL
-Original Message-
From: Gregory Stark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, 25 February 2008 12:31
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Cc: Scott Marlowe; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Planner: rows=1 after similar to where condition.
Joris Dobbelsteen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Should
Resent due to bounce...
orange.nl #5.0.0 X-SMTP-Server; host sss.pgh.pa.us[66.207.139.130] said:
550
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, 25 February 2008 16:34
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Cc: Gregory Stark; Scott Marlowe; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, 25 February 2008 16:34
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Cc: Gregory Stark; Scott Marlowe; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Planner: rows=1 after similar to
where condition.
Joris Dobbelsteen [EMAIL
Dear,
I'm currently reading through the Postgresql documentation about how
several functions work and which ones I would need. So far the
documentation is great and well-structured!
Unfortunally I'm not sure what functions will actually do when some
non-obvious input is provided (which is
I seem to have some planner oddity, where it seems to completely
mispredict the output after a regex compare. I've seem it on other
occasions, where it completely screws up the join. You can note the
rows=1 after the filter.
A similar sitution has occurred when doing a regex filter in a subquery,
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of dfx
Sent: Sunday, 3 February 2008 10:38
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: [GENERAL] how to add array of objects to a record
Hi list,
Can I add an array of object to a record?
For example if I have
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Russell Aspinwall
Sent: woensdag 17 oktober 2007 9:34
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: [GENERAL] newbie question
Hi,
[snip] For example, if you had a
built a database and application using
-Original Message-
From: Russell Aspinwall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: woensdag 17 oktober 2007 11:37
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] newbie question
Joris Dobbelsteen wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Magnus Hagander
Sent: zaterdag 23 juni 2007 11:39
To: Naz Gassiep
Cc: Tony Caduto; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Proposed Feature
Naz Gassiep wrote:
Hey,
I'm sure that'd be
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Hunter
Sent: woensdag 13 juni 2007 22:03
To: Stefan Kaltenbrunner
Cc: PostgreSQL General List
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] pointer to feature comparisons, please
At 3:26p -0400 on 13 Jun 2007, Stefan
going to help you securing your web server, is it? So
though considering a small part of the system, many important aspects
are already overlooked. Yet the weakest chain determines the strength of
the entire system.
Leave security to specialist, it's a really really hard to get right.
- Joris
Hint: LEFT JOIN is your mistake...
Thought: are you sure you are going to delete those rows? In there cases
human verification is usually the way to go, though it takes a lot of
time.
Read on...
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
-Original Message-
From: Francisco Reyes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: donderdag 24 mei 2007 2:04
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Cc: PostgreSQL general
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Delete with subquery deleting all records
Joris Dobbelsteen writes:
Hint: LEFT JOIN is your mistake...
The use
times only and only visible to the
transaction that made those changes. No other transactions, of any
isolation level, can see uncommited changes from other transactions.
Remember, postgres uses the MVCC model.
- Joris Dobbelsteen
---(end of broadcast
.
Hopefully this clears it up a bit.
- Joris Dobbelsteen
[snip]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron Johnson
Sent: donderdag 17 mei 2007 22:56
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Fault Tolerant Postgresql (two
machines, two postmasters, one disk array)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED
to
cover all possible cases.
[snip]
- Joris Dobbelsteen
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
there is fewer use.
I believe heartbeat is also one of the elements in redhats cluster
suite.
- Joris Dobbelsteen
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Please state
*
Which version of postgresql are you using?
*
Which exact commands are you executing?
*
What are the exact error messages?
Please be more precise. Your question is, I believe, too vague for the
community to offer good help with your
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marcelo de
Moraes Serpa
Sent: dinsdag 24 april 2007 21:06
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Audit-trail engine: getting the
application's
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John D. Burger
Sent: zaterdag 7 april 2007 2:04
To: Postgres General
Subject: [GENERAL] New to concurrency
For the first time, I find myself wanting to use some of PG's
concurrency control stuff, and I
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brandon Aiken
Sent: woensdag 21 maart 2007 15:25
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Lifecycle of PostgreSQL releases
[snip]
Software *always* has bugs.
Sorry, couldn't resist...
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Naz Gassiep
Sent: zondag 18 maart 2007 14:45
To: Naz Gassiep
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Design / Implementation problem
Here it is again with more sensible wrapping:
*** The
was nice: http://psti.equinoxbase.com/cgi-bin/handler.pl
- Joris
-Original Message-
From: Aaron Bingham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: donderdag 8 maart 2007 11:36
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Cc: Merlin Moncure; postgres general
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] sql formatter/beautifier
Joris Dobbelsteen wrote
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: maandag 5 maart 2007 16:28
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: [GENERAL] Why don't dumped files parse in pgAdmin3
query editor?
Here's something I've always wondered. When
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shiva Sarna
Sent: vrijdag 2 maart 2007 6:03
To: Bill Moran; Joshua D. Drake
Cc: Shiva Sarna; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] supporting 2000 simultaneous connections.
Hi,
Thanks for
See the discussion [GENERAL] Database versus filesystem for storing
images earlier on the List.
It started at 31 december 2006 and ended 9 januari 2007.
It goes trough all/most pro/con arguments for different options.
- Joris
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Martijn van Oosterhout [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: vrijdag 23 februari 2007 9:50
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] complex referential integrity constraints
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 12:41:25AM +0100, Joris
and useful for the TODO list. At least it
makes it a lot easier (and maintanable) to enforce database-wide
constraints.
- Joris
-Original Message-
From: Robert Haas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: woensdag 21 februari 2007 3:37
To: Joris Dobbelsteen; elein
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
I have some trouble guarenteeing that an ordering constraint is enforced
on the database. On the table ordering (see below) I want to enforce
that for every tuple t, all tuples u where u.position t.position this
implies u.cumvalue = t.cumvalue.
Unfortunally postgresql gives me a choice between
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joris
Dobbelsteen
Sent: donderdag 22 februari 2007 14:27
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: [GENERAL] Guarenteeing ordering constraints
I have some trouble guarenteeing that an ordering constraint
is enforced on the database. On the table ordering (see below)
I
-Original Message-
From: Robert Haas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: donderdag 22 februari 2007 15:58
To: Joris Dobbelsteen; elein
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: RE: [GENERAL] complex referential integrity constraints
The ability to make a foreign key reference a specific
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: donderdag 22 februari 2007 17:16
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Guarenteeing ordering constraints
Joris Dobbelsteen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have some trouble
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Martijn van Oosterhout
Sent: donderdag 22 februari 2007 18:17
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Cc: Robert Haas; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] complex referential integrity constraints
On Thu
-Original Message-
From: Martijn van Oosterhout [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: donderdag 22 februari 2007 23:15
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Cc: Robert Haas; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] complex referential integrity constraints
On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 06:51:49PM +0100
-Original Message-
From: Stephan Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: donderdag 22 februari 2007 23:13
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Cc: Martijn van Oosterhout; Robert Haas; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] complex referential integrity constraints
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Joris
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of elein
Sent: zondag 18 februari 2007 23:16
To: Robert Haas
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] complex referential integrity constraints
On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 09:58:56AM -0500, Robert
PostGreSQL (7.4 and onward) has such a thing build-in, but its not
particulary good (simple case works, but once it gets complex it makes a
mess out of it).
For example the postgresql formatted version
$CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW Subquery AS
$ SELECT t1.a, t2.b
$ FROM ( SELECT 1 AS a, 2 AS x) t1
$
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Willy-Bas Loos
Sent: dinsdag 30 januari 2007 9:41
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: [GENERAL] Unauthorized users can see db schema and read
functions
Hi,
I've noticed that any user who can logon to a db
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Panther
Sent: dinsdag 30 januari 2007 7:07
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: [GENERAL] SELECT FOR UPDATE with ORDER BY to avoid
row-level deadlock?
Hi,
My problem is that if I try to update more
or other languages.
- Joris Dobbelsteen
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Meyer
Sent: zondag 28 januari 2007 15:36
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] counting query
Joris Dobbelsteen wrote:
CREATE TABLE attendance
(
attendanceid serial primary key
-Original Message-
From: Douglas McNaught [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: zondag 28 januari 2007 16:29
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Cc: John Meyer; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] counting query
Joris Dobbelsteen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What would have been better
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Wipf
Sent: donderdag 25 januari 2007 22:42
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: [GENERAL] Duplicate key violation
I got a duplicate key violation when the following query was performed:
INSERT
I believe you should design it in a slightly different way:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
gustavo halperin
Sent: donderdag 25 januari 2007 21:34
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: [GENERAL] triggers vs b-tree
Hello I have a
, the vacuuming should pay back.
A nice metric might be: cost_of_not_vacuuming / cost_of_vacuuming.
Obviously, the higher the better.
- Joris Dobbelsteen
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
-Original Message-
From: Alvaro Herrera [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: dinsdag 9 januari 2007 22:18
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Cc: Chris Browne; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Autovacuum Improvements
Joris Dobbelsteen wrote:
Now we have at least one different model
-Original Message-
From: Alvaro Herrera [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: dinsdag 9 januari 2007 3:43
To: Joris Dobbelsteen
Cc: Chris Browne; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Autovacuum Improvements
Joris Dobbelsteen wrote:
Why not collect some information from live
Why not collect some information from live databases and perform some
analysis on it?
Possible values required for (to be defined) vacuum heuristic,
Human classification of tables,
Updates/Transactions done (per table/db),
Growth of tables and indexes,
(all with respect to time I believe)
Try:
select blue.name, 'blue' from blue union select red.name, 'red' from
red;
Not tested, but that should work.
One thing to remember:
If blabla is in both blue and red, it will appear twice, instead of only
once as in your example.
- Joris
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Matthew O'Connor
Sent: woensdag 20 december 2006 2:53
To: Glen Parker; Postgres General
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Autovacuum Improvements
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
[snip]
I would go one step further and suggest
I've set up a little test to find out how much permissions users have in
PostGreSQL.
It seems that the CONNECT privilege cannot be assigned or is not
recognized by postgresql 8.1.
When using pgAdmin-III it does not display the granted CONNECT
priviledge.
Also when doing GRANT CONNECT FOR DATABASE
80 matches
Mail list logo
