Hi,
David G. Johnston" writes:
> On Friday, July 11, 2025, Zhang Mingli wrote:
>> So, are both result sets technically correct given the absence of an ORDER
>> BY clause?
> The system is behaving within the requirements of the specification. The
> query itself is bugged code that the query aut
slowing of the queries or query
performance issues
Thanks
Dinesh Nair
From: Erik Nordström
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2025 3:19 PM
To: PostgreSQL Hackers
Subject: A concurrent VACUUM FULL?
You don't often get email from e...@timescale.com. Learn why thi
supported in an underlying table by primitive types.
[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sql-createview.html#SQL-CREATEVIEW-UPDATABLE-VIEWS
Thanks
Dinesh Nair
From: Malthe
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2025 5:36 PM
To: Postgres hackers
Subject: Composite typ
ts/secure-bytes-without-pgcrypto>
In Postgres it’s common to see the SQL random() function used to generate a
random number, but it’s a pseudo-random number generator, and not suitable for
cases where real randomness is required critical. Postgres also provides a way
of getting secure random n