Hi,
I'm trying to write some user-defined functions in C which operate on a
large object (so their common first argument will be an OID referencing an
object in the pg_largeobject catalog table created with lo_create()) and
return either a single row or a set depending on the function. Depending o
On 02/04/13 08:35, jesusthefrog wrote:
On the topic of 'natural' versus 'synthetic' primary keys, I am
generally in the camp that an extra ID field won't cost you too much,
and while one may not need it for a simple table (i.e. id, name) one
might add any number of columns later, and you'll be
http://www.ortopediabolivianoaleman.com/iuvniebs/udci.msbep?gl
CauBa
Hi everyone! I need your help with this problem.
I'm using PostgreSQL *9.2 Server* & the latest jdbc
driver: postgresql-9.2-1002.jdbc4.jar
I have a many to one relation. I have this piece of code:
con.setAutoCommit(false); //transaction block start
// Make an insert to one table (Vector)
// Aft
On Sat, 2013-03-30 at 09:52 -0400, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
> That's why I suggested that operations between money(2) and money(3)
> should raise an error. Treat them as distinct types.
I don't think typmod is currently powerful enough to do that. It's lost
in many different types of expressions.
On 02/04/13 06:35, jesusthefrog wrote:
> On the topic of 'natural' versus 'synthetic' primary keys, I am
> generally in the camp that an extra ID field won't cost you too much,
> and while one may not need it for a simple table (i.e. id, name) one
> might add any number of columns later, and you'll
On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 8:35 AM, jesusthefrog wrote:
> On the topic of 'natural' versus 'synthetic' primary keys, I am generally
> in the camp that an extra ID field won't cost you too much, and while one
> may not need it for a simple table (i.e. id, name) one might add any number
> of columns la
On the topic of 'natural' versus 'synthetic' primary keys, I am generally
in the camp that an extra ID field won't cost you too much, and while one
may not need it for a simple table (i.e. id, name) one might add any number
of columns later, and you'll be glad to have it.
I am, however, against us
Hello !
One's more question arises. In my function sometimes I have to init random
number generator via gsl_rng * r = gsl_rng_alloc (gsl_rng_taus); see
http://www.gnu.org/software/gsl/manual/html_node/Random-number-generator-initialization.html,
may I keep this generator between connections to da
Merlin,
Perfect. Thank you.
Best,
--Lee
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 5:32 PM, Lee Hachadoorian
> wrote:
> > I'm working on some PL/pgSQL functions to generate dynamic SQL. The
> > functions live in the public schema, but the SQL generated w
On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 5:32 PM, Lee Hachadoorian
wrote:
> I'm working on some PL/pgSQL functions to generate dynamic SQL. The
> functions live in the public schema, but the SQL generated will vary
> depending on what schema they are called from. Something is going on which I
> cannot figure out.
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 1:22 AM, Jasen Betts wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 07:08:15PM +1300, Tim Uckun wrote:
>> >
>> > how about using an enum instead of this table?
>> >
>> >
>> That's an interesting idea. Are enums mutable?
>
>
> since 9.1 you can add values.
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/
On 03/31/2013 04:47 PM, Tore Halvorsen wrote:
Good idea, but both master and the two slaves are separate machines.
CCing the list.
On the second machine does the tablespace path already exist and does it
already have files in it?
On Mar 31, 2013 10:21 PM, "Adrian Klaver" mailto:adrian.kla.
On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 12:06:25AM +0200, Enke, Dr., Michael wrote:
> I have to find out if a column ( i = 0, ..., tupdesc->natts-1 ) is part of a
> primary key
> but for performance reasons I do not want to execute another query via SPI.
> Is this possible?
Simpler and probably even faster appro
14 matches
Mail list logo
