Tom Lane-2 wrote
> Stephen Frost <
> sfrost@
> > writes:
>> * Moshe Jacobson (
> moshe@
> ) wrote:
>>> Any PG committers who can change this in 9.3?
>
>> It will certainly not be changed for 9.3.
>
> IMO, if we do anything about this at all, it should be to document the
> "=" option not remov
2013/6/1 Tom Lane :
> Stephen Frost writes:
>> * Moshe Jacobson (mo...@neadwerx.com) wrote:
>>> Any PG committers who can change this in 9.3?
>
>> It will certainly not be changed for 9.3.
>
> IMO, if we do anything about this at all, it should be to document the
> "=" option not remove it. If we
Stephen Frost writes:
> * Moshe Jacobson (mo...@neadwerx.com) wrote:
>> Any PG committers who can change this in 9.3?
> It will certainly not be changed for 9.3.
IMO, if we do anything about this at all, it should be to document the
"=" option not remove it. If we change it, the squawks from pe
Stephen Frost writes:
> * DT (kurt...@hotmail.com) wrote:
>> I'm reading code of nodeSeqscan, and was confused with ExecSeqMarkPos and
>> ExecSeqRestrPos. They are only called by ExecMergeJoin. Could merge join use
>> a plain seqscan as outer/inner plan? If not, what are they used for?
> ExecSeqM
On 05/31/13 16:27, David Salisbury wrote:
>
> It would seem related to the above to me, but apparently it's not.
> ---
> According to the standard, the column-list syntax should allow a list of
> columns to be assigned from a single row-valued expression,
> such as a sub-select:
>
On 05/31/2013 08:15 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 05/31/2013 06:32 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
But why? The OP specified FOR EACH ROW in the trigger statement.
Hmm. I went to the SQL spec, and the behavior expected by Juliano
seems to be what it mandated by the spec. To
On 5/31/13 4:45 PM, Bosco Rama wrote:
On 05/31/13 15:33, David Salisbury wrote:
And without trying too much ;), I'll bet there is no way to do this in SQL
proper. i.e.
I can't correlate an update with a select stmt, as in a correlated sub-query
sort of way.
So for this to work I would ind
On 05/31/13 15:33, David Salisbury wrote:
>
> And without trying too much ;), I'll bet there is no way to do this in SQL
> proper. i.e.
> I can't correlate an update with a select stmt, as in a correlated sub-query
> sort of way.
> So for this to work I would indeed need to write a function tha
On 5/31/13 4:21 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 2:37 PM, David Salisbury mailto:salisb...@globe.gov>> wrote:
I would think this would be possible. I'm on 9.0.8
I have a reference between two tables, and want to populate a field in one
table
with a value that's in
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 2:37 PM, David Salisbury wrote:
>
> I would think this would be possible. I'm on 9.0.8
>
> I have a reference between two tables, and want to populate a field in one
> table
> with a value that's in the referenced table ( based on the FK reference of
> course ).
>
> with r
2013/6/1 David Salisbury
> I would think this would be possible. I'm on 9.0.8
>
Data-Modifying CTEs are available since 9.1:
http://www.depesz.com/2011/03/16/waiting-for-9-1-writable-cte/
Please note, that CTE acts as an optimization fence, therefore you might
experience query slowdown.
--
On 05/31/13 14:37, David Salisbury wrote:
>
> I would think this would be possible. I'm on 9.0.8
IIRC, updatable CTE's don't appear until 9.1.x
HTH
Bosco.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/ma
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 7:37 AM, David Salisbury wrote:
>
> I would think this would be possible. I'm on 9.0.8
>
> I have a reference between two tables, and want to populate a field in one
> table
> with a value that's in the referenced table ( based on the FK reference of
> course ).
>
> with ro
I would think this would be possible. I'm on 9.0.8
I have a reference between two tables, and want to populate a field in one table
with a value that's in the referenced table ( based on the FK reference of
course ).
with row as ( select my.atmos_site_id, my.stationid from my_stations my,
at
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 7:32 PM, wrote:
> 1.) Is there any way to clear the cache so that we can ensure that when we
> run "explain analyze" on a query and make some minor adjustments to that
> query and re-execute, the plan is not cached.
PostgreSQL doesn't cache query plans if you do a normal
Two questions Please1.) Is there any way to clear the cache so that we can ensure that when we run "explain analyze" on a query and make some minor adjustments to that query and re-execute, the plan is not cached. Since the cached plan returns runtimes that are much lower than the initial execution
Adrian Klaver wrote:
> On 05/31/2013 06:32 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> Juliano Amaral Chaves wrote:
>>
>>> By doing insert into a table using a query, it seems that all
>>> records of consultation were included bypassing the AFTER INSERT
>>> triggers and as few as after all the records already i
On 05/31/2013 06:32 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Juliano Amaral Chaves wrote:
By doing insert into a table using a query, it seems that all
records of consultation were included bypassing the AFTER INSERT
triggers and as few as after all the records already included,
the TRIGGER is fired for each
Adeelusman wrote:
> i have recently started work with PostgreSQL. Here is my question!
> i have a table in oracle and i want to insert all record in PostgreSQL, For
> this i'm using Foreign Data Wrapper for oracle. it work fine with small set
> of data but as i tried to get large table query got f
Juliano Amaral Chaves wrote:
> By doing insert into a table using a query, it seems that all
> records of consultation were included bypassing the AFTER INSERT
> triggers and as few as after all the records already included,
> the TRIGGER is fired for each record, I wonder if this occurrence
> is
Hi guys.
In the ECPG manual (including latest 9.1.9) about ECPG SQL SET CONNECTION
; it is stated that "This is not thread-aware".
When looking in the ecpg library code connect.c for ECPGsetconn( ... ), it
looks very much like it is thread-aware if translated with the
--enable-thread-
2013/5/31 Adarsh Sharma
> explain analyze select sum(total_cost)as
> cost,date_trunc('month',analytics_date)as monthDate from tableA
> where inr_id in(select id from tableB where ct_id
> ='4028cb972f1ff337012f1ffa1fee0001') and analytics_date between '2013-01-14
> 00:00:00' and '2013-05-29 00:00:
Hi all,
I am using EDB9.2 on CentOS6.3 final server. Facing the slowness of a
query that is taking more than 20 sec to execute. Below are the details :
report_prod=# select pg_size_pretty(pg_total_relation_size('tableA'));
pg_size_pretty
5691 MB
report_prod=# select pg_size_p
23 matches
Mail list logo
