PFC wrote:
PFC wrote:
Hello,
So, I embarked (yesterday) on a weekend project to add a new
feature to Postgres...
I use PHP with persistent connections and always have been
bothered that those very small AJAX queries (usually simple selects
returning 1 row) take more CPU in postgre
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron Mayer
>Sent: Wednesday, 19 December 2007 19:26
>To: Mark Mielke; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Sorting Improvements for 8.4
>
>> Or do you mean being able to perform parts of the
ith default values?
You are suggesting different behaviour for different 'defaults'.
1) If the default is not given (i.e. its actually NULL) than put in
NULL.
2) If the default is explicitly given (NULL or a value) than fail?
I would really suggest using a single one: If the user has n
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg
>Sabino Mullane
>Sent: woensdag 28 maart 2007 2:50
>To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Guarenteeing complex referencial
>integrity through custom triggers
>
[snip]
>
>Much too
>-Original Message-
>From: Hannu Krosing [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: dinsdag 27 maart 2007 15:45
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
>Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Guarenteeing complex referencial
>integrity throughcustom triggers
>
>Ühel
gh.pa.us[66.207.139.130]
said: 5505.0.0 Go away, spammer (in reply to MAIL FROM command)>
[//]
>-Original Message-
>From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: maandag 26 maart 2007 19:52
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [
>-Original Message-
>From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: maandag 26 maart 2007 19:52
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Guarenteeing complex referencial
>integrity through custom triggers
>
>"Jori
ng properly.
A few things remain:
* Language extension? "for referencial" seems not too intrusive.
* SPI_execute_snapshot interoperation, should give a failure.
* Doing parallel tests?
I think about hacking it in... Any opinions?
- Joris Dobbelsteen
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
hout an index, but this is nothing different
than for a normal table.
- Joris Dobbelsteen
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
del is quite tricky and I'm not sure
whether my idea's about it are valid.
The basic idea is that you need to guarentee the constraint for the
'single underlaying model' (with everything visible) and for your view
(under your visibility rules). I beli
hanging
>the performance characteristics so they're predictable and
>scalable. It doesn't matter much if your 1kb table is 100%
>slower than necessary but it does matter if your 1TB table
>needs 1,000x as much vacuuming as your 1GB table even if it's
>getting the
11 matches
Mail list logo
