On 18.08.2012 08:52, Amit kapila wrote:
Tom Lane Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2012 7:16 AM
so it merrily tries to compute a checksum on a gigabyte worth of data,
and soon falls off the end of memory.
In reality, inspection of the WAL file suggests that this is the end of
valid data and what sh
On 08/19/2012 03:01 AM, Jeff Janes wrote:
>Or would you instead say that
>"changes made to a sequence are immediately visible to all other
>transactions" ?
Yes, that sounds better.
OK, how about the attached series, then?
The 2nd probably needs improvement - and I expect I've missed some othe
>
> If there is some syntax that offers a convenient shorthand for WHERE,
> that's fine with me. Or using two tables, one called foo and one called
> foo_history, is also fine. But I don't want the DML syntax to introduce
> new mechanisms that aren't available without the fancy syntax (though
> new
On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 15:12 +0400, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> Hackers,
>
>
> While experimenting with gistchoose I achieve interesting results
> about relation of gistchoose behaviour and gist index bloat.
...
>
> Current implementation of gistchoose select first index tuple which
> have minim
On Mon, 2012-06-25 at 17:46 +0900, Vlad Arkhipov wrote:
> It's not sufficient to store only a period of validity for a row. If two
> transactions started in the same time change the same record, you have a
> problem with TSTZRANGE type because it's normalized to empty interval.
That's an intere
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On 15.08.2012 11:34, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
>
>> Ok, we've to decide if we need "standard" histogram. In some cases it can
>> be used for more accurate estimation of< and> operators.
>> But I t
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> tab completion will add "USING" after CLUSTER VERBOSE, as if VERBOSE
> were the name of a table.
>
> Instead of just making it not do the wrong thing, I tried to make it
> actually do the right thing.
>
> It doesn't fill in the VERBOSE for you,
On Sat, 2012-07-28 at 17:50 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> which would come
> back to bite us if we ever try to support index-only scans with SPGiST.
I'm confused:
http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=92203624934095163f8b57b5b3d7bbd2645da2c8
And the patch that was just committ
Interactively dropping primary key constraints has been annoying me.
I believe this patch fixes that, hopefully for other kinds of
cataloged constraints as well.
I believe this finishes, at least for a while, my tab-completion related gripes.
Cheers,
Jeff
drop_constraint_complete_v1.patch
Des
After upgrading from 8.4 to 9.1, one of my plperl functions stopped working
properly.
For some reason, when matching a string using a regex, the $1 variable
cannot be returned directly using return_next() but must be
set to a variable first.
If returned directly, it appears to be cached in some st
On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 18:10 +0400, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
> wrote:
> I committed the patch now, but left out the support for
> adjacent for now. Not because there was necessarily anything
> wrong with that, but becaus
Six years ago, we punted on allowing rules to use OLD and NEW in
multi-row VALUES constructs, because we didn't have LATERAL:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-08/msg00044.php
I thought maybe that restriction could be fixed now that we do have
LATERAL, and indeed the attached quick
Hello all,
I am providing a patch to allow you to change the output of a boolean
value in psql much like you can do with NULL. A client requested this
feature and we thought it may appeal to someone else in the community.
The patch includes updated docs and a regression test. The code
changes the
13 matches
Mail list logo
