Am 2007-01-30 15:40:23, schrieb Mark Walker:
Maybe that's just my experience with my customers. I have seen signs of
dysfunctional computer systems lately. I was in a fast food restaurant
in San Francisco a few months back and they were manually taking
orders. I think the only reason
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 10:37:34AM -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
I know this is off-topic for this list, but is there a place I can get
some details about linux OOM killer, and the conditions that cause this
OS hang when you turn off the OOM killer? I'd like to really know what's
happening, and
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 11:45:51PM -0600, Tony Caduto wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
That being said, I think it is a dumb feature. If you have data in
one database, that requires access to another database within the
same cluster. You designed your database incorrectly and should be
using
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/30/07 23:46, Paul Lambert wrote:
Richard Troy wrote:
[snip] My observation is that we have a real shortage of
quality
[snip]
Meanwhile, what Operating Systems ARE _today_ reliable choices
upon which to run your Postgres datababse engine?
On 1/30/07, Tony Caduto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know it can be done in M$ SQL server using .. notation and I bet you
can do it in DB2 and Oracle.
you can even do it in MySQL, in MySQL it's their way of implementing
schemas.
exactly. mysql does not have schemas, and imho schemas mysql
Merlin Moncure [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
opinion it would be better to allow schemas to nest than to allow
cross database querying.
Nested schemas would be great, indeed. But, on the other hand, being able to
do queries in other databases would also help with partitioning and legacy
systems
On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 20:44 -0800, David Fetter wrote:
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 04:43:14PM -0800, Richard Troy wrote:
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Mark Walker wrote:
I don't know. My customers expect 24/7 reliability. They expect
to be able to access their info anywhere in the world over a
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 04:43:14PM -0800, Richard Troy wrote:
... different in my opinion if only Unix didn't have this asenine view
that the choice between a memory management strategy that kills
random
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/31/07 12:37, Jeff Davis wrote:
On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 20:44 -0800, David Fetter wrote:
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 04:43:14PM -0800, Richard Troy wrote:
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Mark Walker wrote:
I don't know. My customers expect 24/7 reliability.
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Jeff Davis wrote:
I know this is off-topic for this list, but is there a place I can get
some details about linux OOM killer, and the conditions that cause this
OS hang when you turn off the OOM killer? I'd like to really know what's
happening, and also know more about
I used to have OOM killer problems with Tomcat, Apache's JSP server, but
not any more. A new variable appeared in the config settings which had
to do with the maximum memory that Tomcat would use for itself, and I
think that may have been what fixed the problem. Does Postgresql need
Dblink is nice, but should it really be needed for databases on the same
physical server?
What would be cool is to allow a double dot notation i.e.
database1..schema1.table1
Just a idea. Comments?
--
Tony
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In
This has been discussed about ten thousand times, and the answer is
still no.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
This has been discussed about ten thousand times, and the answer is
still no.
Why? Seems to me if it was discussed that much it must be a very sought
after feature.
How come it's not on the TO Do list for the future at least?
Is it because of some limitation of
Am 30.01.2007 um 12:11 schrieb Tony Caduto:
Why? Seems to me if it was discussed that much it must be a very
sought after feature.
How come it's not on the TO Do list for the future at least?
Is it because of some limitation of the core engine or something?
, January 30, 2007 2:22 PM
To: Postgresql General
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Any Plans for cross database queries on the same
server?
Am 30.01.2007 um 12:11 schrieb Tony Caduto:
Why? Seems to me if it was discussed that much it must be a very
sought after feature.
How come it's not on the TO Do
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/30/07 13:33, Brandon Aiken wrote:
I always assumed the general argument is if you need to query different
databases on the same server with the same application, they ought not
to be separate databases because they're clearly related data.
Ron Johnson wrote:
be separate databases because they're clearly related data.
Just because they are related, doesn't mean that it's always wise to
lump it all in the same database. Mainly for scalability and
performance reasons.
I would tend to agree, there are numerous times being
Tony Caduto [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Considering all these other DBs can do it, doesn't it make sense to at
least put it on the radar for Postgresql?
It's already in the TODO list.
regards, tom lane
---(end of
It's interesting that this is yet another issue of where exactly you
want to place your business logic. Do you do it as much as you can on
your sql server or do you bias it towards your client application. It's
obvious that you can do cross database linking in your application
layer, but if
Mark Walker wrote:
It's sort of a matter of taste, but there are lots of people who like
to keep there logic on the server or at least within sql statements,
so there's probably a good sized market that your not reaching if you
ignore it.
That is a good point, I and many developers I know
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/30/07 14:41, Tony Caduto wrote:
Mark Walker wrote:
It's sort of a matter of taste, but there are lots of people who like
to keep there logic on the server or at least within sql statements,
so there's probably a good sized market that your
On 01/30/07 14:41, Tony Caduto wrote:
Mark Walker wrote:
It's sort of a matter of taste, but there are lots of people who like
to keep there logic on the server or at least within sql statements,
so there's probably a good sized market that your not reaching if you
ignore it.
That
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/30/07 15:55, Richard Troy wrote:
On 01/30/07 14:41, Tony Caduto wrote:
Mark Walker wrote:
[snip]
These days with good open source choices, things are a bit
different, but that doesn't mean it's always good to go hog wild
with any particular
LOL, I remember those days. Uh, can you hold on? My computer just
went down. or you need to fill out form 1203-B, send us $25 and we'll
get you the information you need in six weeks. Just kidding, but
certainly reliability standards and information demands are much higher
these days, aren't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/30/07 16:35, Mark Walker wrote:
LOL, I remember those days. Uh, can you hold on? My computer just
went down. or you need to fill out form 1203-B, send us $25 and we'll
get you the information you need in six weeks. Just kidding, but
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Mark Walker wrote:
LOL, I remember those days. Uh, can you hold on? My computer just
went down. or you need to fill out form 1203-B, send us $25 and we'll
get you the information you need in six weeks. Just kidding, but
certainly reliability standards and information
On 1/30/07, Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This has been discussed about ten thousand times, and the answer is
still no.
How did we go from this?
To this:
It's already in the TODO list.
regards, tom lane
Perhaps we should be more diplomatic in our
I don't know. My customers expect 24/7 reliability. They expect to be
able to access their info anywhere in the world over a variety of
different devices. I can remember times when people would just go home
because computer networks were down. I haven't seen that happen in a
long time.
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Mark Walker wrote:
I don't know. My customers expect 24/7 reliability. They expect to be
able to access their info anywhere in the world over a variety of
different devices. I can remember times when people would just go home
because computer networks were down. I
Mark Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Maybe that's just my experience with my customers. I have seen signs of
dysfunctional computer systems lately. I was in a fast food restaurant
in San Francisco a few months back and they were manually taking
orders. I think the only reason they
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
This has been discussed about ten thousand times, and the answer is
still no.
Actually the answer is: Check the TODO list. It is listed under Exotic
features, so the answer is, no we can't yes we would like to.
That being said, I think it is a dumb feature. If you
for cross database queries on the same
server?
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
This has been discussed about ten thousand times, and the answer is
still no.
Actually the answer is: Check the TODO list. It is listed under Exotic
features, so the answer is, no we can't yes we would like to.
That being
of the original message.
(My corporate masters made me say this.)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Joshua D. Drake
Sent: Tue 1/30/2007 6:15 PM
To: Peter Eisentraut
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org; Tony Caduto
Subject:Re: [GENERAL] Any Plans for cross
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Actually the answer is: Check the TODO list. It is listed under Exotic
features, so the answer is, no we can't yes we would like to.
That being said, I think it is a dumb feature.
FWIW, the SQL committee thinks it's a fine idea --- the SQL-MED
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 06:15:01PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
This has been discussed about ten thousand times, and the answer is
still no.
Actually the answer is: Check the TODO list. It is listed under
Exotic features, so the answer is, no we can't yes we
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 04:43:14PM -0800, Richard Troy wrote:
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Mark Walker wrote:
I don't know. My customers expect 24/7 reliability. They expect
to be able to access their info anywhere in the world over a
variety of different devices. I can remember times when
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 16:43:14 -0800,
Richard Troy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
be better - and once were. (Example, anyone who thinks man pages are
great has obviously got a very limited experience from which to base their
opinion!) ... As a practical matter today we mostly have a choice of
David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 04:43:14PM -0800, Richard Troy wrote:
... different in my opinion if only Unix didn't have this asenine view
that the choice between a memory management strategy that kills
random processes and turning that off and accepting that
David Fetter wrote:
That being said, I think it is a dumb feature. If you have data in
one database, that requires access to another database within the
same cluster. You designed your database incorrectly and should be
using schemas.
I would have to disagree, it's a feature that has
Richard Troy wrote:
[snip]
My observation is that we have a real shortage of quality operating
systems today, and what few exist/remain don't enjoy much market share
because they're not based on Unix, so they're largely missing out on the
Open Source activity. What may be worse, young people
On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 23:45 -0600, Tony Caduto wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
That being said, I think it is a dumb feature. If you have data in
one database, that requires access to another database within the
same cluster. You designed your database incorrectly and should be
using schemas.
42 matches
Mail list logo
