On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 12:10:22 -0800,
Christian Bird [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm a grad student at UC Davis studying the postgres community and I
wanted to know if some on this list could help me out. I'm studying
the factors that affect people graduating from being mailing list
On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 14:55:47 +0200,
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
UPDATE
IF NOT FOUND THEN
INSERT
IF DUPLICATE KEY THEN
UPDATE
END IF
END IF
I believe it is possible for the above to fail. For example another
transaction could create a matching record between
On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 15:07:06 +0100,
Florian G. Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
select * from t1, (delete from t2 returning t2.t1_id) where t1.id =
t2.t1_id limit 1 ;
I for my part couldn't even say what I'd expect that query to do.
I would expect it to delete all rows from t2 but
On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 11:26:23 +0100,
Florian G. Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But just postponing nextval() until after the uniqueness checks
only decreases the *probability* of non-monotonic values, and
*does not* preven them. Consindert two transactions
A: begin ;
B: Begin ;
A:
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 18:14:25 -0500,
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Merlin Moncure [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On friday we upgraded a critical backend server to postgresql 8.2
running on fedora core 4.
Umm ... why that particular choice of OS? Red Hat dropped update
support for
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 15:57:02 +0200,
Devrim GUNDUZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Upgrading OS will probably solve your problem; since there is no way to
upgrade FC4 kernel unless you want to compile kernel source on your
system.
And good luck with that. Fedora still back patches stuff from
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 10:53:34 -0800,
David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 02:13:48PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
What is the practical purpose of the notices emitted by DROP
SOMETHING IF EXISTS when the object in fact does not exist?
DROP ... IF EXISTS is
On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 13:27:47 -0500,
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have applied a patch that resolves the problem AFAICT, but this time
around it would be nice to get some more eyeballs and testing on it.
Please try CVS HEAD or branch tips this afternoon, if you can. Core
is
On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 17:49:15 +0100,
Kaare Rasmussen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure, but as far as I remember, it will be a short release cycle for
8.3 in order to finish some big items that couldn't be ready in time for 8.2.
I believe the point of the short release cycle was more
On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 11:49:36 -0500,
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As already discussed upthread, anyone who wants the path can get it from
`pwd` or local equivalent --- and that mechanism is robust (as long as
the directory move doesn't happen while any particular instance of the
On Sun, Oct 15, 2006 at 14:26:12 -0400,
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At least according to [1], kernel AIO on Linux still doesn't work for
buffered (i.e. non-O_DIRECT) files. There have been patches available
for quite some time that implement this, but I'm not sure when they are
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 08:46:14 -0400,
Obe, Regina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure this is the right group to ask this. I see that the 8.2
notes say all SQL:2003 statistical functions are implemented in 8.2, but
I couldn't find a listing for those anywhere I looked.
For those who
On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 11:54:51 -0400,
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem with regex is that to be upward-compatible with the old
exact-match switch definitions, a switch value that doesn't contain
any regex special characters is treated as an equality condition not
a pattern,
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 19:05:12 -0400,
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure how gmp and the others represent their data but my first guess is
that there's no particular reason the base of the mantissa and exponent have
to be the same as the base the exponent is interpreted
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 22:22:12 -0700,
Tom Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's a worthwhile point. How many patches come from the general
community vs out of the blue? Patches from regulars could probably get a
free pass, which might cut down the review burden substantially.
And how
On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 03:41:06 -0700,
Dhanaraj M [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any utility in postgresql which can do the following?
The utility must update the table whenever there is any change in the
text file.
COPY command helps to do that, though this is not straight forward.
On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 15:08:18 -0400,
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From time to time the idea of a logical vs physical mapping for columns
has been mentioned. Among other benefits, that might allow us to do some
rearrangement of physical ordering to reduce space wasted on
On Mon, Sep 04, 2006 at 17:19:37 +0200,
Hans-Juergen Schoenig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i thought about creating an index on the expression but the problem
is that this is hardly feasable.
in 8.0 (what i have here) this would block the table and i would run
That may be hard to deal
On Mon, Sep 04, 2006 at 19:09:16 +0200,
Hans-Juergen Schoenig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
setting work_mem to 2gb does not help here ;)
set it to the max value on 8.0.
this was my first try too.
the problem is - there is no magic switch to mislead the planner a
little without hacking the
On Thu, Aug 31, 2006 at 12:11:46 +0400,
Victor B. Wagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It contains !MD5 element, because MD5 digest algorithm was broken about
year ago, and PostgreSQL expected to work with versions of OpenSSL which
still consider it strong.
MD5 wasn't completely broken and I
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 12:12:30 +0300,
Devrim GUNDUZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
More will be in FC Extras. Please let me know that if you want to see
any PostgreSQL related software in the repository. I do have time to
package all related stuff.
Do you think you could have a way to store
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 23:15:59 -0400,
Robert Treat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 17 August 2006 11:55, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I'm curious, do you combine any other lists like that? I've played around
with that idea (for example, I used to combine webmaster emails, pgsql-www,
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 15:03:24 -0400,
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
I do, but it is a lot of email and if I miss a few days it takes a while to
catch up again. At some point I will probably do some smarter filtering, but
I don't want to spend
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 08:47:03 +0200,
Zdenek Kotala [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is everything ok with postgres mail server? I have problem to send mail
to hackers list and pgadmin-hacker as well. If somebody is on cc, he
receives mail correctly, but it does not appear in the list. Any
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 14:59:49 +0200,
Dragan Zubac [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it possible to use transactions with 'per sub table' locks? What I
mean,if I partition a table and use transaction on that table with
constraint,will the database lock the master table (and all subtables),or
On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 15:47:16 +0900,
Michael Glaesemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 13, 2006, at 13:25 , Bruno Wolff III wrote:
Date ranges are really closed open as well (as finite sets of
isolated points
are both open and closed). The only oddity would be that the date
used
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 15:13:39 +0900,
Michael Glaesemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's different from being able to show equivalence between two
ranges in different representations, e.g., r1 = r2 iff a1 = a2 and b1
= next(b2). As Bruno pointed out earlier, in some cases, a closed-
On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 23:51:58 +0900,
Michael Glaesemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Each row of this table represents the time range (from from_date to
to_date) during which a teacher was assigned to a particular school.
(Teachers can be assigned to more than one school at a time.) The
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 10:18:11 +0900,
Michael Glaesemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Time (and timestamp) is a bit of a issue conceptually. The default
successor function would depend on the precision of the timestamp.
And in the ideal case it doesn't exist. That is why I think a closed,
On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 16:52:09 -0400,
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of the first things an IT Executive Recruiter needs to learn is
where to post job info - in this case it would be the pgsql-jobs list ;-)
But his timing is pretty good, there will shortly be a bunch of
On Fri, May 26, 2006 at 14:06:29 -0500,
Jim C. Nasby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But if aggregate(*) just gets turned into aggregate(1) by the backend,
why not just tell people to use aggregate(1) for their custom
aggregates? Or am I misunderstanding how aggregate(*) is actually
handled?
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:23:28 +0200,
Albe Laurenz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In order to (efficiently) process a GROUP BY clause, you need a
total ordering on the data type that you group by, i.e. an ordering
such that for any two data x and y you have either x y or x x
or x = y.
An
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 18:38:35 -0400,
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruno Wolff III [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:23:28 +0200,
Albe Laurenz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In order to (efficiently) process a GROUP BY clause, you need a
total ordering on the data
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 01:32:45 -0400,
Greg Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruno Wolff III [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 00:05:16 -0400,
Greg Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruno Wolff III [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Whereas it shouldn't be hard to prove
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 01:13:20 -0400,
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it's a fair point that we could allow SELECT DISTINCT x ORDER BY
foo(x) if foo() is stable, but that does not imply that sorting by x is
interchangeable with sorting by foo(x). foo = abs is a trivial
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 02:39:33 -0400,
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruno Wolff III [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
... it would be OK to rewrite
SELECT DISTINCT x ORDER BY foo(x)
as
SELECT DISTINCT ON (foo(x), x) x ORDER BY foo(x)
This assumes that x = y implies foo(x) = foo(y
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 17:58:07 -0400,
Greg Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Though it's optimized poorly and does a superfluous sort step:
stark= explain select col1 from test group by col1 order by upper(col1);
QUERY PLAN
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 00:05:16 -0400,
Greg Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruno Wolff III [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Whereas it shouldn't be hard to prove that this is equivalent:
stark= explain select col1 from test group by upper(col1),col1 order by
upper(col1
I went back to see if I could find the discussion about this in the past.
It was less than I thought. Most it was me posting with some feedback from
Rod Taylor. The thread started with the subject What user to defaults execute
as? on general, but I mutated the subject to setuid for defaults,
On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 12:28:50 +0200,
Since a real stumbling block with the macro approach seems to be the
granting of permissions maybe we should work on that problem. For
example, making SERIAL be a macro that expands to:
id integer default nextval(sequence) SECURITY DEFINER,
Which
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 14:20:32 -0700,
daveg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 01:49:25PM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 01:14:42PM -0700, David Gould wrote:
To avoid running out of swap and triggering the oom killer we have
had to reduce work_mem
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 15:02:47 -0600,
Tony Caduto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has there ever been any talk of adding a first aggregate function?
It would make porting from Oracle and Access much easier.
Note, that without special support those functions aren't going to run
very fast. So you
On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 12:01:20 -0800,
Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com wrote:
As of Monday I'm at Sun Microsystems. Since I'll be officially the
PostgreSQL Community Guy there I expect to have a lot more time to devote
to community stuff. Not that GreenPlum hasn't been generous with
On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 15:00:07 -0500,
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I find it hard to imagine LDAP being sensibly use for any other postgres
purpose than authentication, despite recent flights of fancy on the list
about storing large slabs of config data there.
It can also
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 19:40:33 -0500,
Clark C. Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While the textual description of this view Identify domain constraints
in this catalog accessable to a given user. has not changed between
SQL-1992 and SQL-2003, the actual critera specified is quite different:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 00:06:41 -0500,
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem with SSN is that somebody other than you controls it.
If you are the college registrar, then you control the student's
registration number, and you don't have to change it. In fact, guess
what: you
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 09:53:11 -0500,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes. Representation of the DNA is probably best. But - that's a lot of
data to use as a key in multiple tables. :-)
On a simple level, this would be a problem for twins.
There are other complications as well. People are going
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 12:08:46 -0600,
Larry Rosenman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The issue is folks that DON'T set reverse DNS, I.E. have generic rDNS
set on their IP's.
I've seen (in my ISP days, and on my mailserver) LOTS of folks that
can't/won't update
Their rDNS, even though it's a
On Mon, Dec 26, 2005 at 15:12:48 -0500,
Gregory Maxwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/26/05, Pavel Stehule [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(1,1) * (1,2) = true
(1,2) * (2,1) is NULL
(2,3) * (1,2) = false
it's usefull for multicriterial optimalisation
This is indeed a sane and useful
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 18:35:07 +0100,
Pavel Stehule [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello
I did some test and I can see so DISTINCT works well on indexed columns,
but is slow on derived tables without indexes. If I use without distinct
group by I get much better times.
SELECT DISTINCT a, b
On Sat, Dec 10, 2005 at 14:25:46 -0300,
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
However there is an effort to get rid of root in some Unix lands,
separating its responsabilities with more granularity. Maybe there
could be an effort, not to hand-hold the true
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 10:57:19 +0100,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just out of curiosity. Is there someone involved with ToDo item %Allow
pg_hba.conf settings to be controlled via SQL?
I don't remember any discussions about this recently, so I doubt it is being
actively worked on right now.
On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 13:01:20 -0500,
Dave Cramer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've talked to Ken Geis via email. He suggests that there is
considerable overhead to be saved if we go to binary; especially in
date, and timestamp fields
One thing though if the date is 64 bit instead of
On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 17:10:58 -0700,
Aly Dharshi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Would the PG Dev group be working on update-able views for 8.2 ? I know
that there is a work-around using rules, the SAMS book does claim that 8.0
has readonly views. I don't think that this has changed in 8.1 no ?
On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 18:48:33 +0100,
Csaba Nagy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, I'm relatively new on this list, and I might have missed a few
discussions on this topic.
I wonder if doing it this way would not be better than using a table
lock:
- set a save point;
- insert the row;
On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 15:09:41 -0500,
Brusser, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a way to find a number of current connections on Postgres 7.3.x
?
This might help you:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.3/static/monitoring.html
---(end of
On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 12:00:12 -0600,
Kevin Grittner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Tony,
As the referenced documentation states, the PostgreSQL SERIALIZABLE
transaction isolation level complies with the ANSI/ISO requirements, but
not with a mathematically pure interpretation of the term.
On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 19:35:30 -0600,
Tony Caduto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We found PostgreSQL a mature product, but in two things Firebird was
simply better than PostgreSQL: Two-Phase commit (ok, that is gone with
PG 8.1), but the second is a SNAPSHOT / REPEATABLE READ transaction
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 18:30:56 +0100,
Csaba Nagy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Floating points numbers are accurate but not precise.
OK, now this one beats me... what's the difference between accurate
and exact ? I thought both mean something like correct, but precise
refers to some
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 23:03:06 +1000,
John Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good people,
Just had a thought!
Might it be worth while protecting the postmaster from an OOM Kill on
Linux by setting /proc/{pid}/oom_adj to -17 ?
(Described vaguely in mm/oom_kill.c)
Wouldn't it be better
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 23:55:07 -0400,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 10:20:39PM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 23:03:06 +1000,
John Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good people,
Just had a thought!
Might it be worth while protecting
On Sat, Sep 10, 2005 at 12:10:19 -0400,
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there an HTML standard that we try to follow in our HTML docs such as
FAQs?
If there isn't an explicit standard, may I suggest that we adopt XHTML
1.0 as the standard?
I ran accross an article a few
On Sat, Sep 10, 2005 at 14:31:06 -0400,
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Sat, Sep 10, 2005 at 12:10:19 -0400,
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there an HTML standard that we try to follow in our HTML docs such as
FAQs
On Sun, Sep 11, 2005 at 00:56:11 +0200,
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
XHTML is simply a minimal reformulation of HTML in XML, and even
uses the HTML 4.01 definitions for its semantics. Given that, it's
hard to see why it should be considered a bad
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 15:21:16 -0400,
huaxin zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
not sure where to put this.
I run two queries:
1. select count(*) from table where indexed_column10;
2. select * from table where indexed_column10;
the indexed column is not clustered at all. I saw from
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 12:09:21 +0300,
Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This has probably been mentioned already, but it makes it much harder to
see which values have been altered from their default values. At the very
least, the default values should be in the comments
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 15:01:25 -0700,
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
O.k. that is probably true, but Matt had a good suggestion. If you are
not subscribed it immediately bounces. I think that is a very good idea.
It would take some load off of the system and the moderaters.
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 23:16:14 -0400,
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us wrote:
I have compiled the 8.1 release notes and converted them to SGML at:
http://candle.pha.pa.us/main/writings/pgsql/sgml/release.html#RELEASE-8-1
I still need to add markup and cleanup, but it is good
On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 18:11:54 +0800,
William ZHANG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
create user foo with createdb will create a user with createdb privilege.
create user bar with createuser will create s superuser who can createdb,
createuser, and update system catalog.
Why not change the
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 17:56:42 -0400,
Chris Browne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is evidently Something Strange about the state of stdout when it
is referenced inside a stored procedure.
I suspect this is related to trusted PLs not being able to write files.
It does seem like a problem
On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 13:47:29 -0700,
Dann Corbit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In round figures:
Since there are 365.2422 days per tropical year, there are 31556926
seconds per year (give or take leap seconds).
Ref:
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/Numbers/Math/Mathematical_Thinking/cale
On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 12:27:50 -0700,
Dann Corbit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Apparently, the Gregorian calendar has been fixed. From this:
http://www.physics.uq.edu.au/people/ross/phys2081/time/calendar.htm
We have this:
The Gregorian calendar has been modified since (before anything
On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 09:39:38 -0400,
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us wrote:
I have added this comment above the DAYS_PER_MONTH macro:
+ /*
+ *DAYS_PER_MONTH is very imprecise. The more accurate value is
+ *365.25/12 = 30.4375, or '30 days 10:30:00'.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 16:30:48 +0300,
Devrim GUNDUZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
There are many commits to back branches and 8.0 branch since the last dot
releases were announced.
Any plans for new releases before 8.1beta1?
I seem
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 23:44:44 -0400,
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The thing that makes this slightly painful is that we can't tell what
version we are dumping *from* until we've connected, and so we cannot
automagically do the right thing here. I don't really see any other
way to
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 10:03:57 -0400,
Darren Alcorn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is a link that has a description. There is also a lot of
examples (of syntax as well) on Oracle's website.
http://www-db.stanford.edu/~ullman/fcdb/oracle/or-objects.html#nested
So they are permitting sets
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 21:48:44 +0100,
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We could implement the torn-pages option, but that seems a lot of work.
Another way of implementing a tell-tale would be to append the LSN again
as a data page trailer as the last 4 bytes of the page. Thus the LSN
On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 13:39:09 +0200,
Fabien COELHO [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The standard talks about 2 distinct concepts: USER and ROLE (4.34). I'm
not sure it is a good idea to drop the user concept to replace it by role.
If you do so, you may miss something about what roles are about.
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 14:45:06 -0400,
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you are the owner of the object to be changed (following the normal
owner checking rules) AND would still be considered the owner of the
object *after* the change, then you can change the ownership.
That
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 14:52:07 -0500,
Bruno Wolff III [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 14:45:06 -0400,
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you are the owner of the object to be changed (following the normal
owner checking rules) AND would still be considered
On Sun, Jun 26, 2005 at 09:52:03 -0400,
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now that the module uses GIST instead of r-tree, there's no very strong
reason why it should provide these operators at all. I propose removing
all of from contrib/cube, leaving only the four
n-dimensional
On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 16:13:24 +0800,
laser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This thread make me to think about the question:
could this feature be used in select count(*) type
query that force it to use index?
count(*) can already be helped by indexes, but probably not the way you think.
The
On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 09:46:50 +1000,
John Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Someone Wrote:
Should not check constraint act as the first filter? The index should
ideally be scanned only when the check constraint is passed by the
search
criteria but surprisingly it did not happen. The
On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 21:54:34 +1000,
John Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruno Wolff III [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Wrote
I think the real problem is that check constraints on tables
aren't used by the optimizer. Given that, what you have below
is expected.
There has been talk
On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 22:11:25 +1000,
John Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I misunderstood the original post as a request for queries NOT to use
indexes where it doesn't match the table contents.
I think that is what they were asking, but I don't think they wanted
to see a sequential scan
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 08:43:01 +0100,
Peter Galbavy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
What is important is that it is possible, and useful, to build Postgres
in a completely non-GPL environment. If that were not so then I think
we'd have some license issues. But the fact that
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 09:40:16 -0700,
Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com wrote:
Pavel,
Statement CONTINUE isn't in PL/SQL too, I know it, but Oracle PL/SQL
has statement GOTO. I don't need GOTO statement, but 'continue' can be
very usefull for me. I have to do some ugly trick now. With
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 20:56:44 +0200,
Gevik babakhani [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear people,
Does anyone know how to execute an OS command from pgsql. I would like to
create a trigger that op on firing would run/execute an external program.
Does such functionality exist or do I
On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 11:49:20 +0200,
Dennis Bjorklund [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
The case that convinced me we need to keep some sort of backslash
capability is this: suppose you want to put a string including a tab
into your database. Try to do it
On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 14:53:41 -0300,
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ERROR: source database template1 is being accessed by other users
Why is this not allowed? Not that there is generally a reason to be in
template1, but am curious as to why it prevents a new DB from
On Thu, May 12, 2005 at 16:59:07 -0700,
David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A PostgreSQL developer has shown in this very thread that it is
extremely easy to screw up a query against those catalogs. Maybe
you're better than he is, but that's not a reason to keep something
simpler out.
On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 16:57:01 -0400,
Dave Cramer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
3) His question was why? With a bsd license you can't stop anyone from
using it and nobody
else can patent it since by placing it in the project you are
establishing prior art.
Nope. They can still be issued a
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 11:09:36 -0700,
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Fri, 6 May 2005, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
1. Public presentation of the project development
Sounds like what http://www.postgresql.org is either doing, or should be
extended to do
On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 14:26:56 +0400,
Oleg Bartunov oleg@sai.msu.su wrote:
Josh,
it's very difficult to read your messages (I'm using Pine), because
of some symbols (~Z on my xterm) which broke formatting.
Is't known problem of pine (4.62) or your mailer ?
There were a lot of \240
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 12:29:33 -0700,
Rob Butler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One way to handle this is to have an option, set by
the client, that
causes the server to send some ignorable message
after a given period
of time idle while waiting for the client. If the
idleness was due
On Sun, May 01, 2005 at 19:57:37 +0300,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Listen Tom, write a client software that releases the
resources / locks that was hold before client power is down
or client connection was lost.
If Postgres can tell the connection has been lost then it should roll
back the
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 10:09:43 -0400,
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Christopher Browne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In the last exciting episode, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us (Bruce Momjian)
wrote:
o integrated auto-vacuum (Bruce)
If this can kick off a
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 12:43:37 -0300,
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
Except for the surprise of peridically having the system go unresponsive
because it hit a large table, and that new user wondering what is wrong
with postgresql
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 09:02:40 -0400,
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us wrote:
Well the good news is that there have been almost no Win32 problems, but
the other good news is that we are getting a lot of powerful features
for 8.1 already:
You forgot to list the indexed aggregate feature
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 12:03:27 -0400,
Bruce Momjian pgman@candle.pha.pa.us wrote:
Agreed. Let's implement '+/-' for 'inet + int4' and put it in the
backend as standard (I can help do the system table stuff if you give me
the C functions). However, how do we handle cases where int4 255.
1 - 100 of 324 matches
Mail list logo
