spans more
> rows.
>
Done. I couldn't figure out a morecols=1 equivalent to keep everything
under the Policy heading without a full colspec.
> For empty cells, maybe a dash would be clearer. Not sure.
Looked cluttered to me. Tried N/A first which was even worse.
--
Rod Taylor
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Rod Taylor writes:
> > In the attached script, the second insert into t2 (as part of the CTE)
> > should succeed.
>
> No, I don't think so. You declared the check function as STABLE which
> means it is confined t
copy
this policy to a number of structures.
The function within the policy doesn't seem to be able to see records
inserted by earlier statements in the CTE. Perhaps this is as simple as
adding a command counter increment in the right place?
Fails in 9.5.7 and HEAD.
--
Rod Taylor
cte_rl
Of course, better thoughts appear immediately after hitting the send button.
This version of the table attempts to stipulate which section of the
process the rule applies to.
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 8:40 PM, Rod Taylor wrote:
> I think the biggest piece missing is something to summarize
I think the biggest piece missing is something to summarize the giant
blocks of text.
Attached is a table that has commands and policy types, and a "yes" if it
applies.
--
Rod Taylor
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_policy.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_policy.sgml
index
at for you to check that you no longer see a
> difference between the single ALL policy and the split SELECT/UPDATE
> policies.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Stephen
>
--
Rod Taylor
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:09 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Rod,
>
> * Rod Taylor (rod.tay...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > My actual use-case involves a range. Most users can see and manipulate
> the
> > record when CURRENT_TIMESTAMP is within active_period. Some users
> >
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Rod Taylor wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 5:31 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>
>> Rod, all,
>>
>> * Joe Conway (m...@joeconway.com) wrote:
>> > On 04/13/2017 01:31 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> > > * Rob
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 5:31 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Rod, all,
>
> * Joe Conway (m...@joeconway.com) wrote:
> > On 04/13/2017 01:31 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > >> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Rod Ta
4: ERROR: 42501: new row violates row-level security
policy for table "t"
LOCATION: ExecWithCheckOptions, execMain.c:2045
*/
SET session authorization default;
SELECT * FROM t;
This seems consistent in both Pg 9.5 and upcoming Pg 10.
--
Rod Taylor
On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
> > Identification of unjoined tables should be very useful - but it is far
> to
> > original proposal - so it can be solved separately.
> >
> > This patch is simple - and usually we prefer more simple patches than on
itial implementation may only allow mypub
from a single connection.
I also suspect multiple publications will be normal even if only 2 nodes.
Old slow moving data almost always got different treatment than fast-moving
data; even if only defining which set needs to hit the other node first and
which set can trickle through later.
regards,
Rod Taylor
On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Konstantin Knizhnik <
k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> On 02.06.2016 17:22, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> konstantin knizhnik writes:
>>
>>> Attached please find patch for DefineDomain function.
>>>
>> You didn't attach the patch,
>>
>
> Sorry, but I did attached the pa
On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> If a lock is successfully obtained on one table, but not on all tables, it
>> releases that lock and will retry to get them as a group in the future.
>> Since inheritance acts as a group of tables (top + recursive cascade to
>> children), this
n the processes holding those locks. It also keeps a list of
everything it did lock so they can be unlocked if necessary.
I'll add it to the open November commitfest.
regards,
Rod Taylor
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/lock.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/lock.sgml
index b946eab..e852f1d 100644
--- a/
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Anastasia Lubennikova <
a.lubennik...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
>
> Proposal Clarification.
> I see that discussion become too complicated. So, I'd like to clarify
> what we are talking about.
>
> We are discussing 2 different improvements of index.
> The one is "pa
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> >> But max_standby_streaming_delay, max_standby_archive_delay and
> >> hot_standby_feedback are among the most frequent triggers for
> >> questions and complaints that I/we see.
> >>
> > Agreed.
> > And a really bad one used to be vacuum_de
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Thom Brown (t...@linux.com) wrote:
> > On 10 October 2014 12:45, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > >> There's a difference between intending that there shouldn't be a way
> > >> past security and just making access a matter of walking a longer
>
reduce conflict issues that a random
ordering may cause between jobs.
regards,
Rod
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Rod Taylor wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
>> I think that pre-sorted, all-unique text datums, that have all
>> differenc
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I think that pre-sorted, all-unique text datums, that have all
> differences beyond the first 8 bytes, that the user happens to
> actually want to sort are fairly rare.
While I'm sure it's not common, I've seen a couple of ten-million tup
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm not entirely convinced that it's worth the extra planning cycles,
> though. Given the small number of complaints to date, it might not
> be worth doing this. Thoughts?
>
Would this avoid execution of expensive functions in views when thei
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Hackers,
>
> I think 9.3 has given us evidence that our users aren't giving new
> versions of PostgreSQL substantial beta testing, or if they are, they
> aren't sharing the results with us.
>
> How can we make beta testing better and more effe
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-01-28 21:48:09 +, Thom Brown wrote:
> > On 28 January 2014 21:37, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Robert Haas
> wrote:
> > >> I've rebased it here and am hacking on it still.
> > >
> > > Andres and I a
257.408 ms
hotel & and & the: 253.574 ms 258.071 ms 250.280 ms
I was hoping that the 'and & the & hotel' case would improve with this
patch to be closer to the 'hotel' search, as I thought that was the kind of
thing it targeted. Unfortunately, it did
I checked out master and put together a test case using a small percentage
of production data for a known problem we have with Pg 9.2 and text search
scans.
A small percentage in this case means 10 million records randomly selected;
has a few billion records.
Tests ran for master successfully an
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 11:39 PM, Rod Taylor wrote:
>
>>
>> The patched index is 58% of the 9.4 master size. 212 MB instead of 365 MB.
>>
>
> Good. That's meet my expectations :)
> You mention tha
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 11:18 PM, Rod Taylor wrote:
>
>> 2%.
>>
>> It's essentially sentence fragments from 1 to 5 words in length. I wasn't
>> expecting it to be much smaller.
>>
>&
itive skin
home remedies removing rust heating
does non raw apple cider
home remedies help maintain healthy
can vinegar mess up your
apple cide vineger ph balance
regards,
Rod
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Rod Taylor wrote:
& the & hotel: 268.577 ms 259.293 ms 257.408 ms
hotel & and & the: 253.574 ms 258.071 ms 250.280 ms
I was hoping that the 'and & the & hotel' case would improve with this
patch to be closer to the 'hotel' search, as I thought that was the kind of
thi
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 4:55 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
>
> I suggest getting the term "stddev" in there somehow, maybe like this:
>>
>> progress: 37.0 s, 115.2 tps, latency avg=8.678 ms stddev=1.792
>>
>
> My issue is to try to keep the line width under control so as to avoid
> line breaks in
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>
> Of course, that begs the question of whether == is already "taken".
> If not, we could knock one '=' off of everything above except for
> "equals". What existing uses are known for == ?
>
== is already taken as a common typo in plpgsql
A poorly coded trigger on the referencing table has the ability to break
foreign keys, and as a result create a database which cannot be dumped and
reloaded.
The BEFORE DELETE trigger accidentally does RETURN NEW, which suppresses
the DELETE action by the foreign key trigger. This allows the recor
I wish to create this data structure but GIN does not currently support an
array of ENUM. Is intarray() a good place to look into adding ENUM support
or is there already an operator class for working supports enums that I
simply don't see at the moment.
This is being done as an alternative to a ve
I have no idea what is going on with the minutes/seconds, particularly for
years under 1895 where it gets appended onto the timezone component?
sk_test=# select version();
version
Po
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 15:11, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Example #4: PK is period, FK is timestamp. FK must be contained in some
> PK period.
>
> CREATE TABLE pk (a period PRIMARY KEY, ...);
>
> CREATE TABLE fk (x timestamp REFERENCES pk (a), ...);
>
> As above, we can probably arrange the opera
> > But it's not the same as tracking *sections of a table*.
>
> I dunno. I imagine if you have a "section" of a table in different
> storage than other sections, you created a tablespace and moved the
> partition holding that section there. Otherwise, how do you prevent the
> tuples from moving
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 14:26, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from Rod Taylor's message of vie feb 25 14:03:58 -0300 2011:
>
> > How practical would it be for analyze to keep a record of response times
> for
> > given sections of a table as it randomly accesses them and generate some
> > kind of
> 4. Even if we could accurately estimate the percentage of the table
> that is cached, what then? For example, suppose that a user issues a
> query which retrieves 1% of a table, and we know that 1% of that table
> is cached. How much of the data that the user asked for is cache?
> Hard to say,
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 13:49, Tom Lane wrote:
> Rod Taylor writes:
>> Does anybody have experience on the cost, if any, of making this change?
>
>> Pg 8.3:
>> Encoding: SQL_ASCII
>> LC_COLLATE: en_US
>> LC_CTYPE: en_US
>
>> Pg 8.4:
>> Enc
We recently upgraded from 8.3 to 8.4 and have seen a performance
degredation which we are trying to explain and I have been asked to
get a second opinion on the cost of going from LATIN1 to UTF8
(Collation and CType) where the encoding remained SQL_ASCII..
Does anybody have experience on the cost,
Is there any particular reason why the citext module doesn't have
citext_pattern_ops operator family?
Specifically, I wish to index for this type of query:
... WHERE citext_column LIKE 'Foo%';
This, of course, is equivalent to ILIKE 'Foo%' which does not appear
to be indexable without using a fu
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 13:20, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Greg Sabino Mullane
> wrote:
>> Perl (DBD::Pg anyway) has been compatible since May 2008.
>
> I would interpret that to mean that there is a significant possibility
> that a too-old DBD::Pg could get used with a
With the update_process_title parameter set to off some PostgreSQL
processes still change their ps title to a different name than the
default. I appreciate this setting came about for performance reasons
which the logger, wal writer, autovacuum, and stats collector would
not have but I actually req
I'm sure there is a good reason why NOT IN will not use an Anti-Join
plan equivalent to NOT EXISTS due to NULL handling, but in this
particular case the value being compared is in the PRIMARY KEY of both
structures being joined.
The NOT IN plan was killed after 10 minutes. The NOT EXISTS plan
retu
>
> \c - secretary
>
> CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION expose_person (person text, phone text)
> RETURNS bool AS $$
> begin
> RAISE NOTICE 'person: % number: %', person, phone;
> RETURN true;
> END; $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql COST 0.01;
>
> postgres=> SELECT * FROM phone_number WHERE expose_person(perso
> So, having dismissed my original off-the-cuff answer to Rod, the next
> question is what's really going wrong for him. I get this from
> a quick trial:
I wish I had kept specific notes on what I was actually trying to do.
I tried to_number first then the expression as seen below. I guess I
saw
I tried making a functional index based on an expression containing
the 2 argument regexp_matches() function. Is there a reason why this
function is not marked immutable instead of normal?
regards,
Rod Taylor
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes
> Yeah. I think it's going to be hard to make this work without having
> standalone transactions. One idea would be to start a subtransaction,
> insert tuples until one fails, then rollback the subtransaction and
> start a new one, and continue on until the error limit is reached.
>
I've found p
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 19:34, Greg Stark wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Alvaro
> Herrera wrote:
> >> The use cases where VACUUM FULL wins currently are where storing two
> >> copies of the table and its indexes concurrently just isn't practical.
> >
> > Yeah, but then do you really nee
On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 9:08 AM, Rod Taylor wrote:
>>> It wouldn't be so bad if you could assign internal and external column
>>> names.
>
>> This is a good point. Uglifying the p
> actually - function name should be used as label now. This code is working:
Not helpful for me. The most typical conflict I have is actually the
OUT parameter and table name, not a column of the table.
Really don't want to prefix all tables with a hardcoded schema or do
variable substitution fo
It wouldn't be so bad if you could assign internal and external column names.
Within the function you call the column "v_foo" but the caller of the
function receives column "foo" instead.
OUT v_foo varchar AS "foo"
Another alternative is requiring a prefix like plout for the
replacement to occu
I would settle for just following the search path as set by the user.
If you explicitly include pg_catalog in the search path, then you should see
those settings.
If you do not explicitly include pg_catalog on the search_path, then it
should not find those items.
Right now pg_catalog sneaks its
How about IS or INTO?
param_name IS 3
param_name IS 'some string value'
3 INTO param_name
'some string value' INTO param_name
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 8:47 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2008/12/12 David E. Wheeler :
>> On Dec 12, 2008, at 2:39 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>> So I think that really th
Wrong. When Oracle says it's committed, it's committed. No
difference between when, where, and how. In Oracle, the committed
version is *always* the first presented to the user... it takes time
to go back and look at older versions; but why shouldn't that be a bit
slower, it isn't common pract
On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 18:32 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Is it time to turn on autovacuum by default in 8.2? I know we wanted to
> be on the side of caution with 8.1, but perhaps we should evaluate the
> experiences now. Comments?
I would say yes.
I use it on 2 databases over the 200GB ma
On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 22:01 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Florian G. Pflug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> But you don't have any cost numbers until after you've done the plan.
>
> > Couldn't this work similar to geqo_effort? The planner could
> > try planning the query using onl
On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 13:44 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > A simple way of doing this might be to use a minimum cost number?
>
> But you don't have any cost numbers until after you've done the plan.
Isn't it possible
On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 16:54 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 14:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I was just looking at Martin Lesser's gripe here:
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2006-08/msg00053.php
> > about how the planner is not real bright about the filter co
> > For db restoration (pg_dump), how do you restore to the same values as
> > previously if it is always regenerated? By making ALWAYS a suggestion
> > for some users instead of always enforced and providing an override
> > mechanism for it. I assume it only works for relation owners but I've
> >
On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 18:10 +0200, Zoltan Boszormenyi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have progressed a bit with my pet project, a.k.a $SUBJECT.
>
> Now GENERATED ALWAYS AS IDENTITY and
> GENERATED ALWAYS AS ( expr ) work as
> intended. Documentation was also extended.
I'm only commenting because I debated t
On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 17:26 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 26. Juli 2006 22:58 schrieb Tom Lane:
> > The reason people want this syntax is that they expect to be
> > able to write, say,
> >
> > UPDATE mytab SET (foo, bar, baz) =
> > (SELECT alpha, beta, gamma FROM otherta
On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 09:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> >> Maybe someone should look into enabling slony to not run as a
> >> superuser?
>
> > That was my initial reaction to this suggestion. But then I realised
> > that
On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 15:00 +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 08:47:38AM -0400, Rod Taylor wrote:
> > It appears that the superuser does not have connection limit
> > enforcement. I think this should be changed.
>
> So if some admin process goes
On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 15:07 +0200, Csaba Nagy wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 15:00, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 08:47:38AM -0400, Rod Taylor wrote:
> > > It appears that the superuser does not have connection limit
> > > enforcement. I t
On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 09:06 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > It appears that the superuser does not have connection limit
> > enforcement. I think this should be changed.
>
> If you're superuser, you are not subject to access r
It appears that the superuser does not have connection limit
enforcement. I think this should be changed.
Slony in particular does not need more than N connections but does
require being a super user.
--
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain an
On Sun, 2006-07-30 at 20:20 -0400, Robert Treat wrote:
> On Thursday 27 July 2006 09:28, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > >> UPDATE mytab SET (foo, bar, baz) =
> > > >> (SELECT alpha, beta, gamma FROM othertab WHE
Sorry, hit send too quickly.
NOLOCK is kinda like NOWAIT, except implies that the command will not
take a strong lock instead of stating that it will not wait for one.
On Mon, 2006-07-24 at 11:20 -0400, Rod Taylor wrote:
> > SHARED CREATE INDEX
>
> > Comments?
>
> SHARED CREATE INDEX
> Comments?
CREATE [UNIQUE] INDEX [WITH NOLOCK] ON ...
--
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 11:03 -0400, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On 7/13/06, Lukas Smith wrote:
> > However I do think that PostgreSQL is missing out in
> > getting new users aboard that are in the early stages
> > of evalutation and simply only consider features that
> > they get along with a default i
On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 23:34 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> In any case the correct way to solve the problem is to find out what's
> >> being left corrupt by SIGTERM, rather than install more messiness in
> >> order to avoid facing the real issue ...
>
> >
On Thu, 2006-06-22 at 13:56 -0400, Mark Woodward wrote:
> >> > You mean systems that are designed so exactly, that they can't take
> >> 10%
> >> > performance change ?
> >>
> >> No, that's not really the point, performance degrades over time, in one
> >> minute it degraded 10%.
> >>
> >> The update
On Thu, 2006-06-22 at 13:42 -0400, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On 6/22/06, Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If you INSERT into multiple partitions (by time -- say one per minute)
> > and TRUNCATE periodically (30 minute old partitions for 30 minute
> > expiry) it
> > You mean systems that are designed so exactly, that they can't take 10%
> > performance change ?
>
> No, that's not really the point, performance degrades over time, in one
> minute it degraded 10%.
>
> The update to session ratio has a HUGE impact on PostgreSQL. If you have a
> thousand acti
> > Here we have for example some tables which are frequently updated but
> > contain >100 million rows. Vacuuming that takes hours. And the dead row
> > candidates are the ones which are updated again and again and looked up
> > frequently...
>
> This demonstrates that "archival" material and "ac
> > I did have dbt2 pretty close to functional on FreeBSD a year ago but
> > it's probably gone back into linuxisms since then.
>
> :(
>
> I won't have the chance to work on this further for another 2 months,
> but if you have patches I could see about picking up on them when I
> get back.
Every
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 14:18 -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 12:29:14PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
>
> > Unless supersmack has improved substantially, you're unlikely to find
> > much interest. Last I heard it was a pretty brain-dead benchmark. DBT2/3
> > (http://sourceforge.n
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 16:28 -0400, Bill Bartlett wrote:
> Can't -- the main production database is over at a CoLo site with access
> only available via SSH, and tightly-restricted SSH at that. Generally
> one of the developers will SSH over to the server, pull out whatever
> data is needed into a t
> The condition (column->is_serial && column->force_default)
> can help enforcing GENERATED ALWAYS at INSERT time
> and can also help fixing the two TODO entries about SERIAL.
You will need to include the insert components of the spec which allow
for overriding GENERATED ALWAYS during an INSERT an
On Tue, 2006-06-06 at 13:53 -0400, Christopher Browne wrote:
> Clinging to sanity, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hannu Krosing) mumbled into her beard:
> > Ühel kenal päeval, T, 2006-06-06 kell 08:42, kirjutas Mark Woodward:
> >> OK, here's my problem, I have a nature study where we have about 10 video
> >> c
> One objection to this is that after moving "off the gold standard" of
> 1.0 = one page fetch, there is no longer any clear meaning to the
> cost estimate units; you're faced with the fact that they're just an
> arbitrary scale. I'm not sure that's such a bad thing, though. For
> instance, some
On Fri, 2006-05-19 at 09:11 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> > On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 02:58:11PM -0400, Mark Woodward wrote:
> >> The reality is that MySQL is widely supported by some very, shall we say,
> >> "interesting" open source projects and using these product
> Actually, I suspect in most cases it won't matter; I don't think people
> make a habit of trying to sort their entire database. :) But we'd want
> to protect for the oddball cases... yech.
I can make query result sets that are far larger than the database
itself.
create table fat_table_with_few
On Tue, 2006-05-16 at 11:53 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Bort, Paul wrote:
> >> Compressed-filesystem extension (like e2compr, and I think either
> >> Fat or NTFS) can do that.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Windows (NT/2000/XP) can compress individual directories and files under
> > NTFS; new files in a
> thhal=# CREATE DOMAIN twodims as int[][];
> CREATE DOMAIN
While still not perfect, you can use a CHECK constraint on the domain to
enforce dimension.
It's not perfect because domain constraints are not enforced in all
locations in versions earlier than 8.2. Adding extra explicit casts can
often
On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 18:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 16:11 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Hm. I wonder if there are any uses of "exit(1)" in the Slony triggers.
>
> > It doesn't a
On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 16:11 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > % 1960 2006-05-02 17:03:19 EDTLOG: 0: server process (PID 10171)
> > exited with exit code 1
>
> Hm. I wonder if there are any uses of "exit(1)" in the Slon
On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 15:10 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 14:31 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Unless you had an actual backend crash, that's not an adequate
> >> explanation. Transaction abort does c
On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 14:31 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > At some point it must have failed in copying the data across, aborted,
> > and restarted.
>
> Unless you had an actual backend crash, that's not an adequate
> explana
On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 14:09 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Am I correct in the thought that the various files listed below are not
> > used by the database and can be safely removed? There were no other
> > active db connections
Am I correct in the thought that the various files listed below are not
used by the database and can be safely removed? There were no other
active db connections when I issued this command.
I think truncate (Slony) left them behind.
ssdb=# select file
from pg_ls_dir('base/'|| (select oid
On Thu, 2006-05-04 at 11:25 -0500, Larry Rosenman wrote:
> Rod Taylor wrote:
> > I don't know about anyone else, but the only time I look at that mess
> > is to find poor tuple/table or tuple/index ratios and other
> > indications that vacuum isn't working as wel
I don't know about anyone else, but the only time I look at that mess is
to find poor tuple/table or tuple/index ratios and other indications
that vacuum isn't working as well as it should be.
How about this instead:
Log when the actual autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor (dead space cleaned
up) was m
On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 23:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Do both. Return SERIAL to being a macro and implement the SQL IDENTITY
> > construct as the black box version.
>
> Doesn't SQL IDENTITY have a number of properties th
On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 17:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> In some recent activity on the patches list about responding to bug #2073,
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2005-11/msg00303.php
> we've been discussing various possible tweaks to the behavior of dropping
> or modifying a serial column
On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 23:50 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I've recently been playing with table partitioning limitations. Turning
> > over a large volume of data in inherited structures in a live
> > environment, and have r
I've recently been playing with table partitioning limitations. Turning
over a large volume of data in inherited structures in a live
environment, and have run into a couple of snags in the planner.
The first is that LEFT JOIN will always do a sequential scan on all
inherited tables.
The second i
On Thu, 2006-03-23 at 16:41 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Now it gives a error that type double does not exist.
> >>> CREATE DOMAIN double AS float8;
> >>>
> >>> There, now the type exists ;)
> >> That's a little too perl for me ;)
> >
> > I suppose it depends on the goal. If it is an appli
On Thu, 2006-03-23 at 16:05 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Rod Taylor wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-03-23 at 17:31 -0600, Tony Caduto wrote:
> >> I could have swore that this worked in earlier releases of Postgresql
> >> i.e. 7.4.
> >>
> >> CREATE TABLE
1 - 100 of 994 matches
Mail list logo
