h, I use this on an ecommunities type site- I haven't seen any errors. This
is also a pg 7.1.3
As an example, something like this might be executed:
select date_trunc('year',age(to_date(dob,'MM/DD/'))) as age from members
where memid=101;
Quoting Ben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> It must be
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Rob Sell wrote:
> Ok I was going to send in the schema from both db's and when trying to get
> the schema through phppgadmin it works fine on the old db, but on the new db
> I get this error "PostgreSQL said: ERROR: Relation "pg_relcheck" does not
> exist"
>
> What is that?
Here is an applied patch that suggests increasing sort_mem during
restore. I though of putting it near the database restore section or in
the manual, but is seemed more centralized to put it near the actual
parameter.
---
Ok I was going to send in the schema from both db's and when trying to get
the schema through phppgadmin it works fine on the old db, but on the new db
I get this error "PostgreSQL said: ERROR: Relation "pg_relcheck" does not
exist"
What is that? And could that be related to my problem?
Rob
--
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Rob Sell wrote:
> We are migrating to a new database server and one piece of code doesn't work
> from the old to new.
> Old server is 7.2.1
> New server is 7.3.2
>
> The sql in question is "Select * from inven as i Left Outer Join conn_xr as
> c on i.partnum = c.facpn"
>
> T
and what about boolean attirbutes in where clauses? Is any difference between
-SELECT ... WHERE boolean_field
and
-SELECT ... WHERE boolean_field=true
?
On Wed, 2003-07-23 at 11:48, Tom Lane wrote:
Franco Bruno Borghesi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This makes me wonder, what about 't' and
We are migrating to a new database server and one piece of code doesn't work
from the old to new.
Old server is 7.2.1
New server is 7.3.2
The sql in question is "Select * from inven as i Left Outer Join conn_xr as
c on i.partnum = c.facpn"
This produces the desired effects on the 7.2.1 server but
> template1=# insert into t values ('1993-08-10 17:48:41');
> INSERT 16980 1
So we are talking about August 10th, right?
> template1=# select f1, date(f1), f1::date, cast(f1 as date) from t;
> f1 |date| f1 | f1
> -++
On Wed, 2003-07-23 at 12:48, Patrick Welche wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 01:36:52PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I am trying to convert a timestamp field to a date. ('1993-08-10
> > 17:48:41.074' to '1993-08-10').
> > I used date(TIMESTAMP_FIELD), but it seemed working
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 01:36:52PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am trying to convert a timestamp field to a date. ('1993-08-10
> 17:48:41.074' to '1993-08-10').
> I used date(TIMESTAMP_FIELD), but it seemed working only for date
> after year 2000 and return the previous date
>
Hi all,
I am trying to convert a timestamp field to a date. ('1993-08-10
17:48:41.074' to '1993-08-10').
I used date(TIMESTAMP_FIELD), but it seemed working only for date
after year 2000 and return the previous date
for any day before year 2000. Is that a bug or I just didn't
understand the func
the only way you can do this is to change your kernel parameters or use 32
connections and 64 buffers
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Errol Neal wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I am using Postgresql 7.3.2 on Solaris 5.9 compiled with gcc and solaris
> ld. Right now, our max number of connections and buffers are set t
On Tuesday 22 July 2003 02:57 pm, Dennis Gearon wrote:
> Let's be nice and only vote once, also. I don't know if they use cookies to
> prevent that, but
Seems that they log IP address (oh yeah.. I tested the cookie thing...:) ).
28% for postgresql now. Second after MySQL.
RDB
> Gavin M. R
(B
(B
(B
(BI have looked around, but not found the standard. Where I have looked,
(Bit seems to be:
(B
(B t/f,
(B . not
(B true/flase
(B 0/1
(B yes/no
(B
(BJean-Christian Imbeault wrote:
(B
(B Nigel J. Andrews wrote:
(B
(B
(BI had do do this s
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> "scott.marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Well, there is no boolean type per se in SQL92. But there is in SQL99.
>
> > Was it pulled from SQL92 before it went standard? My copy of the
> > pre-release lists a
"scott.marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, there is no boolean type per se in SQL92. But there is in SQL99.
> Was it pulled from SQL92 before it went standard? My copy of the
> pre-release lists a boolean type, just like the 99 standard does.
Wh
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jean-Christian Imbeault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Oops, I meant to say can someone point me to a ressource (SQL standard
> > and section?) which states that true/false must be used for booleans :)
>
> Well, there is no boolean type per se in SQL92. Bu
At 11:48 AM 7/23/2003 -0400, Errol Neal wrote:
Hi All,
I am using Postgresql 7.3.2 on Solaris 5.9 compiled with gcc and solaris
ld. Right now, our max number of connections and buffers are set to the
default, which is 32 for connections and 64 for buffers. I want to be able
to increase that to
> You can store them in the filesystem or in PostgreSQL. In PostgreSQL, you
> can either store them as BLOBs or bytea columns. I prefer bytea columns
> for numerous reasons. The only reason I can think of to use a BLOB is if
> you only want to return _part_ of the file.
And even that can be done
On Wednesday, July 23, 2003, at 10:48 AM, Errol Neal wrote:
This error does *not* mean that you have run out of disk space.
Correct.
How do I increase the mentioned kernel values on solaris to be able to
increase the number of connections I need?
Check out the /etc/system file.
Read this:
http
Hi All,
I am using Postgresql 7.3.2 on Solaris 5.9 compiled with gcc and solaris
ld. Right now, our max number of connections and buffers are set to the
default, which is 32 for connections and 64 for buffers. I want to be able
to increase that to 100 Max connections and 200 max buffers, but wh
On 23 Jul 2003 at 12:13, Claudio Lapidus wrote:
> Hello
>
> I'd like to give a try at the new version, referred in many places as 7.4dev
> but I'm unable to find a version named this way for download. Is it the same
> as dev/postgresql-snapshot.tar.gz ? Or is somewhere already a 7.4beta?
There i
On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 12:24:00 +0200,
"Kian Spongsveen (spam account)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> could directly call currval *after* inserting. Doing a manual nextval()
> before the insert is OK, too, but from my understanding it needs the sequence
> name and not the column name?
Yes, nex
Hello
I'd like to give a try at the new version, referred in many places as 7.4dev
but I'm unable to find a version named this way for download. Is it the same
as dev/postgresql-snapshot.tar.gz ? Or is somewhere already a 7.4beta?
When will the 7.4beta become available?
cl.
24 matches
Mail list logo
