Re: [GENERAL] pg_dumping extensions having sequences with 9.6beta3

2016-07-22 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Philippe BEAUDOIN wrote: > I am currently playing with extensions. And I found a strange behaviour > change with 9.6beta2 and 3 when pg_dumping a database with an extension > having sequences. This looks like a bug, ... unless I did something

Re: [GENERAL] Array value from table as parameter

2016-07-22 Thread Jim Nasby
On 7/22/16 7:31 AM, Charles Clavadetscher wrote: I need to pass an array as a parameter in a function, but it is a part of a trigger that get a "new" value. > > I've tested it like > > select function_x(1,55,array[['x'],['y']]) > or > select

Re: [GENERAL] yum repo, pgloader

2016-07-22 Thread John R Pierce
On 7/22/2016 5:50 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote: If I where to hazard a guess it would have to do with pgloader migrating from being written in Python to being written in Common Lisp, that occurred at roughly the same time. ah, yer right, the one in the pg 9.2 repo is 2.3.x, and indeed, pgloader

Re: [GENERAL] yum repo, pgloader

2016-07-22 Thread Adrian Klaver
On 07/22/2016 05:24 PM, John R Pierce wrote: this question is mostly for devrim, who maintains the RHEL/CentOS/Fedora PGDG yum repositories... I note that pgloader is in the yum repo for Postgresql 9.2 on Centos 6, but not 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, wondering if there's a reason it was dropped? If I

[GENERAL] yum repo, pgloader

2016-07-22 Thread John R Pierce
this question is mostly for devrim, who maintains the RHEL/CentOS/Fedora PGDG yum repositories... I note that pgloader is in the yum repo for Postgresql 9.2 on Centos 6, but not 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, wondering if there's a reason it was dropped? -- john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz

d88a45e680327e0b22a34020d8f78252 - Re: [GENERAL] MongoDB 3.2 beating Postgres 9.5.1?

2016-07-22 Thread Attacker One
Hi, I recently test YCSB benchmark too. But contrary to my expectation, PG (9.5) is slower than MongoDB 3.2. Paul said that making table with no logging option improved the performance, and it might be equal to MongoDB's behavior. But in MongoDB documentation, it writes journal log too. So I think

d88a45e680327e0b22a34020d8f78252 - Re: [GENERAL] MongoDB 3.2 beating Postgres 9.5.1?

2016-07-22 Thread Attacker One
Hi, I recently test YCSB benchmark too. But contrary to my expectation, PG (9.5) is slower than MongoDB 3.2. Paul said that making table with no logging option improved the performance, and it might be equal to MongoDB's behavior. But in MongoDB documentation, it writes journal log too. So I think

d88a45e680327e0b22a34020d8f78252 - Re: [GENERAL] MongoDB 3.2 beating Postgres 9.5.1?

2016-07-22 Thread Attacker One
Hi, I recently test YCSB benchmark too. But contrary to my expectation, PG (9.5) is slower than MongoDB 3.2. Paul said that making table with no logging option improved the performance, and it might be equal to MongoDB's behavior. But in MongoDB documentation, it writes journal log too. So I think

Re: [GENERAL] unique constraint with several null values

2016-07-22 Thread Jim Nasby
On 7/20/16 1:14 PM, Mark Lybarger wrote: This leads me to think I need to create 2^5 or 32 unique constraints to handle the various combinations of data that I can store. Another option would be to create a unique index of a bit varying field that set a bit to true for each field that was

d88a45e680327e0b22a34020d8f78252 - Re: [GENERAL] MongoDB 3.2 beating Postgres 9.5.1?

2016-07-22 Thread Attacker One
Hi, I recently test YCSB benchmark too. But contrary to my expectation, PG (9.5) is slower than MongoDB 3.2. Paul said that making table with no logging option improved the performance, and it might be equal to MongoDB's behavior. But in MongoDB documentation, it writes journal log too. So I think

[GENERAL] pg_dumping extensions having sequences with 9.6beta3

2016-07-22 Thread Philippe BEAUDOIN
Hi all, I am currently playing with extensions. And I found a strange behaviour change with 9.6beta2 and 3 when pg_dumping a database with an extension having sequences. This looks like a bug, ... unless I did something wrong. Here is a test case (a simple linux shell script, that can be

d88a45e680327e0b22a34020d8f78252 - Re: [GENERAL] MongoDB 3.2 beating Postgres 9.5.1?

2016-07-22 Thread Attacker One
Hi, I recently test YCSB benchmark too. But contrary to my expectation, PG (9.5) is slower than MongoDB 3.2. Paul said that making table with no logging option improved the performance, and it might be equal to MongoDB's behavior. But in MongoDB documentation, it writes journal log too. So I think

Re: [GENERAL] Array value from table as parameter

2016-07-22 Thread Charles Clavadetscher
Hello > From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Aislan Luiz Wendling > Sent: Mittwoch, 20. Juli 2016 19:17 > To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org > Subject: [GENERAL] Array value from table as parameter > > Hi, > > I need to pass an array

Re: [GENERAL] pg_dump without any SET command in header of output plain text sql file

2016-07-22 Thread Alex Ignatov
Ok, thanks ! Alex Ignatov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company On 22.07.2016 06:49, Sameer Kumar wrote: On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 7:14 PM Alex Ignatov > wrote: And what is the options

Re: [GENERAL] For storing XML version in our table.

2016-07-22 Thread Charles Clavadetscher
> From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of zubair alam > Sent: Mittwoch, 20. Juli 2016 09:09 > To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org > Subject: [GENERAL] For storing XML version in our table. Hi How i can store my xml data with their