On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Steve Litt
wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 11:31:02 +0900
>
>
> On every successful mailing list, somebody inevitably suggests
> replacing it with "a forum" or "a facebook page" or some
> proprietary website that acts as a middleman
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 11:31:02 +0900
Michael Paquier wrote:
> If you have subscribed to more mailing lists than -general, having one
> subfolder per list can also help a lot, grouping as well some of those
> having a low activity, for example:
> - one folder for -hackers
Jeff Janes schrieb am 27.03.2017 um 19:07:
I have some code which uses table_log
(http://pgfoundry.org/projects/tablelog/) to keep a log of changes to
selected tables. I don't use the restore part, just the logging
part.
It creates a new table for each table being logged, with several
> I have some code which uses table_log
> (http://pgfoundry.org/projects/tablelog/) to keep a log of changes to
> selected tables.
> I don't use the restore part, just the logging part.
> It creates a new table for each table being logged, with several additional
> columns, and adds
De : pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org] De la part de Ron Ben
Envoyé : Monday, March 27, 2017 11:05 AM
À : pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Objet : [GENERAL] Request to add feature to the Position function
> position(substring in string)
> as listed
Jiri Sadek writes:
> On 27.3.2017 15:46, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think you'll find that 9.6.2 makes this significantly better.
>> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git=commitdiff=48a6592da
> Actually we did all the testing on 9.6.2-1.pgdg16.04+1 from
>
I have some code which uses table_log (
http://pgfoundry.org/projects/tablelog/) to keep a log of changes to
selected tables. I don't use the restore part, just the logging part.
It creates a new table for each table being logged, with several additional
columns, and adds triggers to insert rows
On 03/27/2017 09:15 AM, David G. Johnston wrote:
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Brian Dunavant >wrote:
That does not return the correct answer for the original poster's
request.
flpg=#
select position('om' in
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Adrian Klaver
wrote:
> On 03/27/2017 09:03 AM, Brian Dunavant wrote:
>
>> That does not return the correct answer for the original poster's request.
>>
>> flpg=# select position('om' in reverse('Tomomasaaa'));
>> position
>>
Putting together Adrian Klaver's, and David Johnson's suggestions I
think gets to what he was asking for:
# select length('Tomomasomaa') - position(reverse('om') in
reverse('Tomomasomaa'));
?column?
--
12
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 12:16 PM, Adrian Klaver
On 03/27/2017 09:03 AM, Brian Dunavant wrote:
That does not return the correct answer for the original poster's request.
flpg=# select position('om' in reverse('Tomomasaaa'));
position
--
15
(1 row)
It shows the position counting back from the end. If you want counting
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Brian Dunavant wrote:
> That does not return the correct answer for the original poster's request.
>
> flpg=#
>
> select position('om' in reverse('Tomomasaaa'));
> position
> --
>15
> (1 row)
>
>
Easy oversight to
That does not return the correct answer for the original poster's request.
flpg=# select position('om' in reverse('Tomomasaaa'));
position
--
15
(1 row)
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Adrian Klaver
wrote:
> On 03/27/2017 08:05 AM, Ron Ben
On 03/27/2017 08:05 AM, Ron Ben wrote:
Hi,
position(substring in string)
as listed here:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/functions-string.html
locates sub string in a string.
It doesn't support locateing the substring from the back.
For example:
position('om' in 'Tomomas')
gives 2
Hi,
position(substring in string)
as listed here:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/functions-string.html
locates sub string in a string.
It doesn't support locateing the substring from the back.
For example:
position('om' in 'Tomomas')
gives 2
But if I want to locate the first
On 27.3.2017 15:46, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jiri Sadek writes:
>> we are in the process of migrating postgresql 9.1 to 9.6 and we
>> encounter a memory issues with 9.6 - one of our procedure consumed all
>> free memory (~8GB) of the testing server (and make it to swap), there
>>
Jiri Sadek writes:
> we are in the process of migrating postgresql 9.1 to 9.6 and we
> encounter a memory issues with 9.6 - one of our procedure consumed all
> free memory (~8GB) of the testing server (and make it to swap), there
> was never such problem with 9.1. After some
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 8:36 PM, pinker wrote:
> If PostgreSQL decides to use an index, does he every time load the whole
> B-tree into memory? or maybe loads only specific subtree or some chunks of
> index?
src/backend/access/nbtree/README provides details about the algorithm
of
If PostgreSQL decides to use an index, does he every time load the whole
B-tree into memory? or maybe loads only specific subtree or some chunks of
index?
--
View this message in context:
http://www.postgresql-archive.org/Index-loading-methods-tp5952220.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - general
Hi all,
we are in the process of migrating postgresql 9.1 to 9.6 and we
encounter a memory issues with 9.6 - one of our procedure consumed all
free memory (~8GB) of the testing server (and make it to swap), there
was never such problem with 9.1. After some testing we found out that it
is caused
20 matches
Mail list logo