=?UTF-8?Q?Torsten_F=C3=B6rtsch?= writes:
> My question is can I somehow express something like
> EXCLUDE (c1 WITH =, c2 with NOT =)
> It seems that's not possible at the moment. But is there any obstacle in
> principle or is it just not implemented?
Well, it'd likely be a bad idea. Indexes are m
Hi all,
I recently started at a new firm and have been trying to help to grok
certain planner behavior. A strip-down example of the sort of join we do in
the database looks like this, wherein we join two tables that have about 1
million rows:
-- VACUUM (FULL, VERBOSE, ANALYZE), run the query twic
Hi,
I wanted to create an exclusion constraint like
EXCLUDE (c1 WITH =, c2 with <>)
This gives an error:
operator <>(integer,integer) is not a member of operator family
"integer_ops"
I can resolve that by using gist and the btree_gist extension.
My question is can I somehow express something
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 10:55 AM Ruslan Zakirov
wrote:
> Thanks for replying. Maybe I'm just wrong in my assumption. A user reports
> incorrect order in the following query:
>
> SELECT main.*, COUNT(main.id) OVER() AS search_builder_count_all FROM (
> SELECT DISTINCT main.* FROM Tickets main
>
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 6:06 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Ruslan Zakirov writes:
> > I know how to fix the problem and I know that ORDER BY should be in the
> > outermost select.
>
> > However, I want to write a test case that shows that the old code is
> wrong,
> > but can not create
> > minimal set of
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 2:20 PM Joe Conway wrote:
> On 6/13/23 04:17, Dominique Devienne wrote:
> > To troubleshoot and validate that emulation, I'd like to introspect ROLE
> > membership to:
> >
> > 1) Output the ROLE "path(s)" between any two ROLEs.[...]
> > 2) Output all target ROLEs [...] a g
Ruslan Zakirov writes:
> I know how to fix the problem and I know that ORDER BY should be in the
> outermost select.
> However, I want to write a test case that shows that the old code is wrong,
> but can not create
> minimal set of tables to reproduce it. With this I'm looking for help.
The ORD
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 1:26 PM Thomas Kellerer wrote:
> Ruslan Zakirov schrieb am 13.06.2023 um 09:49:
> > For example I have a query:
> >
> > SELECT main.*, count(*) OVER () FROM (SELECT DISTINCT ... ORDER BY X)
> > main;
> >
> > So the `ORDER BY` clause ended up in a subquery. Most of the time
Hi,
> On Jun 12, 2023, at 11:57, Raj Kiran wrote:
> Prokopto is completing our annual vendor review process. Please share your
> most recent SOC II Type 2 report.
The PostgreSQL project isn't SOC2 certified, and will almost certainly never
be. If you require SOC2 compliance, you'll need to wo
On 6/13/23 06:34, Francisco Olarte wrote:
[snip]
But if you want to restore to ANY point in time you would need a copy
of the initial state of the database and ALL the wal files. Normally
you do not want to do this, at most you want to restore to "any point
in the last 3 days", in which case you
On 6/13/23 04:17, Dominique Devienne wrote:
Hi. We emulated a legacy security model (enforced in C/C++ code)
into "layers" of PostgreSQL ROLEs and GRANTs, thus enforced database-side.
To troubleshoot and validate that emulation, I'd like to introspect ROLE
membership to:
1) Output the ROLE "p
On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 at 10:01, Wen Yi <896634...@qq.com> wrote:
> As you can see, base on the wal, we can restore the database to any check
> point, but sometimes, If we insert a large column to the postgres (Up to 1
> GB), the postgres will also create a 1 GB wal to store it.
You normally restor
Ruslan Zakirov schrieb am 13.06.2023 um 09:49:
> For example I have a query:
>
> SELECT main.*, count(*) OVER () FROM (SELECT DISTINCT ... ORDER BY X)
> main;
>
> So the `ORDER BY` clause ended up in a subquery. Most of the time
> ordering works until it doesn't.
>
> Can you help me create a set of
On 6/13/23 12:57, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 10:35 AM rihad wrote:
Hi, all. When pg_upgrading from PG 11 to 13, a file analyze_new_cluster.sh was
generated in the current directory which ran vacuumdb --all --analyze-in-stages
When upgrading from 13 to 15.3 no such file was
Because the function is general and should do the same thing for many
different table.
Unique constraint, each table must have a field with a specific type
Il mar 13 giu 2023, 01:31 Adrian Klaver ha
scritto:
> On 6/12/23 15:13, Lorusso Domenico wrote:
> > Hello guys,
> > I'm a problem with dynam
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 10:35 AM rihad wrote:
>
> Hi, all. When pg_upgrading from PG 11 to 13, a file analyze_new_cluster.sh
> was generated in the current directory which ran vacuumdb --all
> --analyze-in-stages
>
> When upgrading from 13 to 15.3 no such file was generated, which made me
> bel
Hi, all. When pg_upgrading from PG 11 to 13, a file
analyze_new_cluster.sh was generated in the current directory which ran
vacuumdb --all --analyze-in-stages
When upgrading from 13 to 15.3 no such file was generated, which made me
believe it was no longer necessary. Alas, it wasn't the case.
Hi, all. When pg_upgrading from PG 11 to 13, a file
analyze_new_cluster.sh was generated in the current directory which ran
vacuumdb --all --analyze-in-stages
When upgrading from 13 to 15.3 no such file was generated, which made me
believe it was no longer necessary. Alas, it wasn't the case.
Hi. We emulated a legacy security model (enforced in C/C++ code)
into "layers" of PostgreSQL ROLEs and GRANTs, thus enforced database-side.
To troubleshoot and validate that emulation, I'd like to introspect ROLE
membership to:
1) Output the ROLE "path(s)" between any two ROLEs. Typically between
Hi community,
When I learn the wal log, a question confuse me.
As you can see, base on the wal, we can restore the database to any check
point, but sometimes, If we insert a large column to the postgres (Up to 1 GB),
the postgres will also create a 1 GB wal to store it.
In this situation, will th
Hello,
For example I have a query:
SELECT main.*, count(*) OVER () FROM (SELECT DISTINCT ... ORDER BY X) main;
So the `ORDER BY` clause ended up in a subquery. Most of the time ordering
works until it doesn't.
Can you help me create a set of test tables with some data to reproduce
this problem
HI ,
To whom it may concern,
Prokopto is completing our annual vendor review process. Please share your
most recent SOC II Type 2 report.
Thank you!
Regards,
Raj Kiran.S
22 matches
Mail list logo
