On 11/15/24 11:46, Bharani SV-forum wrote:
Team
Need exact SQL query to find List of Detach Partitioned Tables (Yet to
be Dropped)
The following is the query which i used, i am using and i found an bug
which is listing an newly created table (last week)
As David G. Johnston said how woul
On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 12:46 PM Bharani SV-forum
wrote:
> Need exact SQL query to find List of Detach Partitioned Tables (Yet to be
> Dropped)
>
>
The premise that a detached table is distinguishable from any other table
that is not a partition is an interesting one that I wouldn't necessarily
e
Team
Need exact SQL query to find List of Detach Partitioned Tables (Yet to be
Dropped)
The following is the query which i used, i am using and i found an bug which is
listing an newly created table (last week)
SELECT relnamespace::regnamespace::text AS schema_name, relname AS table_name
FROM
On Thu, 14 Nov 2024 08:42:36 +
Patrick FICHE wrote:
> I was wondering if it was possible to get the filename provided as an
> argument to psql.
> psql -f /tmp/test.sql
>
Since you know it already, you could pass it as a variable :
psql -f /tmp/test.sql -v my_path='/tmp/test.sql'
and retr
Thanks... I just found that myself... so normal behavior then...
On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 10:47 AM Adrian Klaver
wrote:
> On 11/15/24 06:27, Andy Hartman wrote:
> > I created a new table (V16) and then used SimplySql to take data from
> > mssql to the new Postgres table. The table is 212gig in s
PG normally splits table data into 1GB chunks. The number before the dot is
called the filenode. You can translate it into a table name by
select oid::regclass::text from pg_class where relfilenode='2474695';
I believe there is an option to change that chunk size but you'd have to
recompile Postg
On 11/14/24 00:42, Patrick FICHE wrote:
Hi,
I was wondering if it was possible to get the filename provided as an
argument to psql.
Not that I know of.
psql -f /tmp/test.sql
I would like a command in test.sql that would be able to retrieve the
full pathname (/tmp/test.sql).
Regards,
P
On 11/15/24 06:27, Andy Hartman wrote:
I created a new table (V16) and then used SimplySql to take data from
mssql to the new Postgres table. The table is 212gig in size. Myquestion
comes from the files created on the OS(Windows2022 server) I can see
lots of files with the last being:
247469
On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 9:38 AM Philip Couling wrote:
> Is there a solid reason why adding a check constraint does not use
> existing indexes for validation.
>
> We are currently looking at partitioning a multi TB table leaving all
> existing data in place and simply attaching it as a partition t
I created a new table (V16) and then used SimplySql to take data from
mssql to the new Postgres table. The table is 212gig in size. Myquestion
comes from the files created on the OS(Windows2022 server) I can see lots
of files with the last being:
2474695.143
They are all 1,048,576kb
Is this nor
On Thu, 2024-11-14 at 21:33 +, Philip Couling wrote:
> Is there a solid ready why validating check constraints cannot use existing
> indexes?
> If I can prove the constraint is valid so trivially with a SELECT, then why
> can
> Postgres not do the same (or similar)?
I assume that the simple
Is there a solid reason why adding a check constraint does not use existing
indexes for validation.
We are currently looking at partitioning a multi TB table leaving all
existing data in place and simply attaching it as a partition to a new
table. To prevent locking, we are trying to add an INVALI
12 matches
Mail list logo
