Re: [HACKERS] i want to find

2005-03-26 Thread Michael Fuhr
[Reply-To set to pgsql-general] On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 11:11:19PM -0800, chamil wijenayake wrote: > i want to find the last update time of a tuple(row) in the postgresql data > base You can set up a trigger to maintain a timestamp for the row. See the example in the "Trigger Procedures" secti

Re: [HACKERS] problem with rules - column values lost

2005-03-26 Thread Tom Lane
Daniel Schuchardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > there seem to be a bug in the 8.0 Rule System if I update a view and > does not give a column an value. You can't seriously expect that example to work. The DELETE removes the row that lang_abzu() needs to have in order to yield a non-null result,

[HACKERS] i want to find

2005-03-26 Thread chamil wijenayake
hi   i want to find the last update time of a tuple(row) in the postgresql data base   please be knid enough to reply me a solution if u know   thanking you in advance   chamil Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.

[HACKERS] problem with rules - column values lost

2005-03-26 Thread Daniel Schuchardt
Hi List, there seem to be a bug in the 8.0 Rule System if I update a view and does not give a column an value. example TEST=# \d abzu_ruletest View "public.abzu_ruletest" Column | Type| Modifiers +---+--- abz_txt| character varyi

Re: [HACKERS] Postgres recoverey for deleted row of data

2005-03-26 Thread Qingqing Zhou
"Srinivasa Perumal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes > > hi, is there is way undelete or recover the deleted row in a table in postgres.iam layman, can anyone help me. > Here is one way but I am not sure it is a good one. The precondition is that you didn't schedule any vacuum on your database. Since P

Re: [HACKERS] Patch for collation using ICU

2005-03-26 Thread Palle Girgensohn
--On lördag, mars 26, 2005 17.40.01 -0800 Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sun, 27 Mar 2005, Palle Girgensohn wrote: --On lördag, mars 26, 2005 08.16.01 -0800 Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 26 Mar 2005, Palle Girgensohn wrote: >> I've noticed a couple of things ab

Re: [HACKERS] Patch for collation using ICU

2005-03-26 Thread Stephan Szabo
On Sun, 27 Mar 2005, Palle Girgensohn wrote: > > > --On lördag, mars 26, 2005 08.16.01 -0800 Stephan Szabo > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sat, 26 Mar 2005, Palle Girgensohn wrote: > >> I've noticed a couple of things about using the ICU patch vs. pristine > >> pg-8.0.1: > >> > >> - ORDER B

Re: [HACKERS] Patch for collation using ICU

2005-03-26 Thread Palle Girgensohn
--On lördag, mars 26, 2005 13.59.19 +1100 John Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: - ORDER BY is case insensitive when using ICU. This might break the SQL standard (?), but sure is nice :) This would mean that indexes are also case insensitive right? Which makes it a Bad Thing(tm). Well, no, not r

Re: [HACKERS] Patch for collation using ICU

2005-03-26 Thread Palle Girgensohn
--On lördag, mars 26, 2005 08.16.01 -0800 Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sat, 26 Mar 2005, Palle Girgensohn wrote: I've noticed a couple of things about using the ICU patch vs. pristine pg-8.0.1: - ORDER BY is case insensitive when using ICU. This might break the SQL standard (?), b

Re: [HACKERS] Bug 1500

2005-03-26 Thread Josh Berkus
Alvaro, > On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 02:04:14PM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > > SELECT to_char( INTERVAL '43 hours 20 minutes', 'MI' ) || ' min'; > > 2600 min > > Hmm, what if you wanted more than one literal string? Say "1 mon 3 > days" ... your concatenation idea wouldn't work. ISTM the format stri

Re: [HACKERS] Bug 1500

2005-03-26 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > ... ISTM the format string > should allow unconverted literals, so you would use > SELECT to_char( INTERVAL '43 hours 20 minutes', 'MI min' ); ... which to_char can do already, IIRC. The rewrite should define a new set of format substitution codes, b

Re: [HACKERS] Bug 1500

2005-03-26 Thread Alvaro Herrera
On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 02:04:14PM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > SELECT to_char( INTERVAL '43 hours 20 minutes', 'MI' ) || ' min'; > 2600 min Hmm, what if you wanted more than one literal string? Say "1 mon 3 days" ... your concatenation idea wouldn't work. ISTM the format string should allow unc

Re: [HACKERS] Bug 1500

2005-03-26 Thread lsunley
This has my vote Lorne In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 03/26/05 at 02:04 PM, Josh Berkus said: >Karel, >> > Yeah. áKarel Zak, who wrote that code, is convinced we should remove it, >> > but I don't think anyone else is ... >> >> áI think I was Peter and Josh Berkus who convinced me that t

Re: [HACKERS] Bug 1500

2005-03-26 Thread Josh Berkus
Karel, > > Yeah. ÂKarel Zak, who wrote that code, is convinced we should remove it, > > but I don't think anyone else is ... > > ÂI think I was Peter and Josh Berkus who convinced me that the code is > bed. "we should remove..." is opinion only... I certainly didn't recommend removing it before w

Re: [HACKERS] understanding pg_stat* numbers

2005-03-26 Thread Oleg Bartunov
On Sat, 26 Mar 2005, Tom Lane wrote: Oleg Bartunov writes: I'm looking for blocks *actually* read from disk, since IO is the most important factor. Well, you won't find that out from Postgres, since it has no idea whether a read() request was satisfied from kernel disk cache or had to actually go

Re: [HACKERS] understanding pg_stat* numbers

2005-03-26 Thread Tom Lane
Oleg Bartunov writes: > I'm looking for blocks *actually* read from disk, since IO is the most > important factor. Well, you won't find that out from Postgres, since it has no idea whether a read() request was satisfied from kernel disk cache or had to actually go to disk. You could turn on log

Re: [HACKERS] minor windows & cygwin regression failures on stable branch

2005-03-26 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Well, it seems at least to be running. When I fire up postmaster there > are 4 processes running and no indication of failure that I could see on > the log. (There is a complaint about failing to dup(0) after 3195 > successes - I assume that has nothi

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] problem with CR+LF in files in psql \i command

2005-03-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote: > Hi Bruce, > > > Function and comments are just _strings_ to PostgreSQL, so we have no > > good way of cleaning the output up, unless we hack pg_dump to somehow > > change line endings when outputting such information, though > > currently we > > don't. The would

Re: [HACKERS] minor windows & cygwin regression failures on stable

2005-03-26 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Jim, that is just execllent! Thank you so much! I assume you mean XP-Pro - I gather that user permissions get in the way on XP-HE. We can make the one machine do double duty for Windows and Cygwin. You will need installed: . cygwin, including whatever it takes to build cygwin postgres . native

Re: [HACKERS] Patch for collation using ICU

2005-03-26 Thread Stephan Szabo
On Sat, 26 Mar 2005, Palle Girgensohn wrote: > I've noticed a couple of things about using the ICU patch vs. pristine > pg-8.0.1: > > - ORDER BY is case insensitive when using ICU. This might break the SQL > standard (?), but sure is nice :) Err, I think if your system implements strcoll correctly

Re: [HACKERS] minor windows & cygwin regression failures on stable

2005-03-26 Thread Jim Buttafuoco
Andrew, I can set one up a dedicated windows XP system on monday. I also have some w2k systems that can be used.Are there directions anywhere? Jim -- Original Message --- From: Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: PostgreSQL-development Sen

Re: [HACKERS] minor windows & cygwin regression failures on stable

2005-03-26 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Tom Lane wrote: Dunno about the stats failure. It looks like the stats collector just isn't working on Cygwin, but AFAIR no one has touched that code lately. Well, it seems at least to be running. When I fire up postmaster there are 4 processes running and no indication of failure that I coul

[HACKERS] understanding pg_stat* numbers

2005-03-26 Thread Oleg Bartunov
Hi there, I'm investigating one performance issue with tsearch2 index and trying to interperet io statiscs from pg_statio_user_tables, pg_stat_user_tables. But from documentation it's not clear what numbers I shoud take into account and I'm a bit confused :) I'm looking for blocks *actually* read

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump issue : Cannot drop a non-existent(?) trigger

2005-03-26 Thread Devrim GUNDUZ
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, On Fri, 25 Mar 2005, Tom Lane wrote: Does "\d pg_trigger" show that the tgargs column is of type bytea? Umm no: tgnargs| smallint | not null tgargs, not tgnargs. Ooops, sorry. Ok, tgargs is of type bytea. Also, get the OID for this pg_tr