On Thu Dec, 20, 2018 at 9:17 PM Kumar, Virendra
wrote:
> I figured it out, this is how it works:
> --
> hostall all0.0.0.0/0
> ldap ldapserver=server1.com ldapserver=server2.com ldapprefix=PROD01\
>
> So documentation need some update.
>
Just FYI I tried out t
Hi,
I am trying to install a binary zip into my different machines using a
batch file,
it works on some machines but giving me this error on other machines.
*Windows Event log:*
Faulting application name: initdb.exe, version: 13.0.1.20314, time stamp:
0x5faa5f0f
Faulting module name: ucrtbase.dll
>-Oprindelig meddelelse-
>Fra: Tom Lane
>Emne: Re: where clauses including timstamptz and intervals
>
>Ron writes:
>> On 4/9/21 5:24 AM, hubert depesz lubaczewski wrote:
>>> For example, in my timezone:
>>>
>>> (1 row)
>>>
>>> Please note that there is 1 hour difference.
>>> The reason
Ron:
On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 5:53 PM Ron wrote:
> >> Are these two queries exactly eqivalent? The table is partitioned on
> >> r_time, which is a timestamptz. The explain plans are not exactly the
> >> same. The first wants to scan a partition more than the latter.
> >>
> >> select f.xx from f
> >
On Fri, 9 Apr 2021, 4:44 pm Durumdara, wrote:
> Dear Members!
>
> We have a server.
> Because of high usage we can't log DDL-s. There are too many temporary
> tables created by users, so it would slow down the server.
> A database owner changed.
>
> What can we do to get info about the change (wh
Ron writes:
> On 4/9/21 5:24 AM, hubert depesz lubaczewski wrote:
>> For example, in my timezone:
>>
>> $ select ('2020-10-01 00:00:00+00'::timestamptz + interval '1 month'),
>> '2020-11-01 00:00:00+00'::timestamptz;
>> ?column?│ timestamptz
>> ┼─
On 4/9/21 6:14 AM, Durumdara wrote:
Dear Members!
We have a server.
Because of high usage we can't log DDL-s. There are too many temporary
tables created by users, so it would slow down the server.
A database owner changed.
What can we do to get info about the change (who did it, from what IP
On 4/9/21 5:24 AM, hubert depesz lubaczewski wrote:
On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 07:24:54AM +, Niels Jespersen wrote:
Hello all
Are these two queries exactly eqivalent? The table is partitioned on
r_time, which is a timestamptz. The explain plans are not exactly the
same. The first wants to scan
On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 11:05:34PM +0800, Glen Huang wrote:
> This discussion really questioned my understanding of concurrency in
> PostgreSQL, thanks a lot.
>
> I gave the corresponding part of the doc some more read, and I’m now
> in the option that insolation level has no effect on CTEs, but ple
This discussion really questioned my understanding of concurrency in
PostgreSQL, thanks a lot.
I gave the corresponding part of the doc some more read, and I’m now in the
option that insolation level has no effect on CTEs, but please correct me if
I’m wrong.
If notionally all queries execute a
Dear Members!
We have a server.
Because of high usage we can't log DDL-s. There are too many temporary
tables created by users, so it would slow down the server.
A database owner changed.
What can we do to get info about the change (who did it, from what IP, when
it happened) in the future?
As I
On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 07:24:54AM +, Niels Jespersen wrote:
> Hello all
>
> Are these two queries exactly eqivalent? The table is partitioned on
> r_time, which is a timestamptz. The explain plans are not exactly the
> same. The first wants to scan a partition more than the latter.
>
> sele
Try removing security definer ... It should work.
--
Sent from: https://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-general-f1843780.html
Hello all
Are these two queries exactly eqivalent? The table is partitioned on r_time,
which is a timestamptz. The explain plans are not exactly the same. The first
wants to scan a partition more than the latter.
select f.xx from f
where f.r_time >= '2020-10-01 00:00:00+00'::timestamptz
an
14 matches
Mail list logo
