Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Greg Stark kirjutas E, 01.12.2003 kell 18:15:
> > Separate OS partitions is a reasonable use of partitioned tables, but the
> > biggest advantage is being able to drop and load partitions very quickly, and
> > without impacting performance at all. loadin
I seen that the configure is done with:
--with-krb5=/usr.
make sure that you have krb5-devel installed.
I also try to install the RPM already builded but I obtain:
file /usr/include/sqltypes.h from install of
postgresql-devel-7.4-0.5PGDG conflicts with file from package
unixODBC-devel-2.2.3
Hi all,
I'm still experiencing problem trying to
rebuild the rpm from the file:
postgresql-7.4-0.5PGDG.src.rpm
what I get is:
checking for library containing com_err... -lcom_err
checking for library containing krb5_encrypt... no
configure: error: could not find function 'krb5_encrypt' required fo
Sorry for this posting. I was trying to do too many things at once. I
have posted the WITH OID email to the proper thread.
---
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Josh Berkus wrote:
> >
Patch applied. Thanks.
---
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >
> >> Here is what I get:
> >>
> >> peter ~$ pg-install/bin/initdb pg-install/var/data
> >> ...
> >>
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
> > Hmmm. Robert spoke to an "IP" attorney off the record who felt
> > differently. I think it would really be to our benefit to get an
> > attorney to go "on the record" about this (which means a fee,
> > unfortunately). Your o
Greg Stark kirjutas E, 01.12.2003 kell 18:15:
> Separate OS partitions is a reasonable use of partitioned tables, but the
> biggest advantage is being able to drop and load partitions very quickly, and
> without impacting performance at all. loading or dropping millions of records
> becomes a simpl
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> What's happening to the remaining patches that were held over for 7.5,
> e.g. mine which does some logging enhancements?
I want to review that more thoroughly. It is still in the 7.5 queue. I
am not done with that yet:
http:/momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgp
What's happening to the remaining patches that were held over for 7.5,
e.g. mine which does some logging enhancements?
cheers
andrew
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
I will be in Japan December 2-10 speaking about PostgreSQL.
--
Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup.| Newtown Square,
Manfred Koizar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> comparetup_index() compares two IndexTuples. The structure
> IndexTupleData consists basically of not much more than an ItemPointer,
> and the patch is not much more than adding a comparison of two
> ItemPointers. So how does the patch introduce a new
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 00:02:54 -0500 (EST), Bruce Momjian
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tom Lane wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> And if it doesn't help index
>> >> creation speed, at least the resulting index has better correlation.
... which has been shown by the example in
Greg Stark writes:
> Oliver Elphick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Then it needs to be stated very prominently. But the place to put a
> > sign saying "Dangerous cliff edge" is beside the path that leads along
> > it.Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, p
>
> The only way to make this prominent would
Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I'd expect copy to be a single command, no matter how many rows were
>> copied.
> It might prevent you from using pg_dump --inserts ?
Not even that, unless you *also* modified the dump output to wrap
BEGIN/END a
Clinging to sanity, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (ow) mumbled into her beard:
> --- Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Wouldn't the above put a limit on a number of records one could have
>> > in table?
>>
>> No.
>
> If I understand correctly, a table that has 4B+ rows cannot be restored after
> the d
On Mon, 2003-12-01 at 16:39, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Renaming the directories is the only suggestion I've seen that makes
> sense. The others remind me of the warning that is now placed on coffee
> cup lids at fast food places: "Caution, Contents May Be Hot".
I agree that renaming the directorie
--- Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > If I understand correctly, a table that has 4B+ rows cannot be restored
> after
> > the dump and that, in turn, may/will affect the ability to upgrade to new
> > versions of pgSql.
>
> You don't understand correctly.
I
Greg Stark wrote:
Oliver Elphick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Then it needs to be stated very prominently. But the place to put a
sign saying "Dangerous cliff edge" is beside the path that leads along
it.
The only way to make this prominent would be a file with the *name* "THIS
DIRECTORY
ow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If I understand correctly, a table that has 4B+ rows cannot be restored after
> the dump and that, in turn, may/will affect the ability to upgrade to new
> versions of pgSql.
You don't understand correctly.
regards, tom lane
--
Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd expect copy to be a single command, no matter how many rows were
> copied.
It might prevent you from using pg_dump --inserts ?
--
greg
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensiv
Oliver Elphick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Then it needs to be stated very prominently. But the place to put a
> sign saying "Dangerous cliff edge" is beside the path that leads along
> it.
The only way to make this prominent would be a file with the *name* "THIS
DIRECTORY CONTAINS CRITICAL D
Jonathan Gardner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Usually, it is data that is related to each other somehow. I guess an
> example would be for an internet host who wants to provide a common
> shopping cart functionality for all of its customers, but put their
> specific data on a specific partitio
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, ow wrote:
> > --- Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Actually you can only have 4 billion SQL commands per xid, because the
> > CommandId datatype is also just 32 bits. I've never heard of anyone
> > running into that limit, though.
> >
>
> Wouldn't the above put a limit
--- Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Wouldn't the above put a limit on a number of records one could have
> > in table?
>
> No.
If I understand correctly, a table that has 4B+ rows cannot be restored after
the dump and that, in turn, may/will affect the ability to upgrade to new
versions
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How is a "parameterized view" any different than a set returning SQL function?
> In either case, you've got the same work to do to teach the optimizer how to
> understand it, no? Seems like the todo is just that, teach the optimizer how to
> do better with
ow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> --- Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Actually you can only have 4 billion SQL commands per xid, because the
>> CommandId datatype is also just 32 bits. I've never heard of anyone
>> running into that limit, though.
> Wouldn't the above put a limit on a numb
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
>>Oliver Elphick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>>On Sun, 2003-11-30 at 23:18, Neil Conway wrote:
>>>
I do agree that we could stand to document the purpose of pg_clog
and pg_xlog more clearly. However, this information belongs in the
standard
> --- Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually you can only have 4 billion SQL commands per xid, because the
> CommandId datatype is also just 32 bits. I've never heard of anyone
> running into that limit, though.
>
Wouldn't the above put a limit on a number of records one could have in ta
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I was just annoyed to find out that a foreign key doesn't check whether
> the referenced column has a sufficiently similar data type, it only checks
> whether an = operator exists. This masks schema design errors and typos.
> Should this be tightened
Tom Lane wrote:
> Oliver Elphick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sun, 2003-11-30 at 23:18, Neil Conway wrote:
> >> I do agree that we could stand to document the purpose of pg_clog
> >> and pg_xlog more clearly. However, this information belongs in the
> >> standard documentation, not scattered
Oliver Elphick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 2003-11-30 at 23:18, Neil Conway wrote:
>> I do agree that we could stand to document the purpose of pg_clog
>> and pg_xlog more clearly. However, this information belongs in the
>> standard documentation, not scattered throughout $PGDATA.
> The
Andreas Pflug wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> >I was just annoyed to find out that a foreign key doesn't check whether
> >the referenced column has a sufficiently similar data type, it only checks
> >whether an = operator exists. This masks schema design errors and typos.
> >Should this be t
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 08:12:54AM +0300, Dmitry G. Mastrukov wrote:
> I'm preparing new release of uniqueidentifier datatype. In new relaease
> in addition to existing btree operator class I've implemented hash
> operator class. But what class should be default for this datatype?
> Uniqueidentifi
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 06:31:56PM +0800, phd9110 wrote:
> the table pg_attribute have the attribute "attlen" , and this attribute will
> store the attribute length. For example , when integer , this value will be 4.
> But if attribute type is Char(xx), this value will be -1. This is because it
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I was just annoyed to find out that a foreign key doesn't check whether
the referenced column has a sufficiently similar data type, it only checks
whether an = operator exists. This masks schema design errors and typos.
Should this be tightened up, for example using the ca
I was just annoyed to find out that a foreign key doesn't check whether
the referenced column has a sufficiently similar data type, it only checks
whether an = operator exists. This masks schema design errors and typos.
Should this be tightened up, for example using the castability
characteristics
hi the table pg_attribute have the
attribute "attlen" , and this attribute willstore the attribute
length. For example , when integer , this value will be 4.But if attribute
type is Char(xx), this value will be -1. This is because itreference the
bychar in pg_type table.So, where is the Cha
On Sun, 2003-11-30 at 23:18, Neil Conway wrote:
> Oliver Elphick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The use of the word "log" in the directory name does tend to invite
> > this error, and some have acted on it without asking first. I think
> > initdb should put a README.IMPORTANT file in $PGDATA to s
38 matches
Mail list logo
