Tom Lane indicated this thread should be moved here. Instead of asking for
what I consider the solution, let me propose a real business case and you
guys tell me how best to handle it.
I am building an Enterprise Data Warehouse with PostgreSQL. BTW, I love
this database. I will have data
Option 5 would be to deprecate the ability to use a \ in an object name.
Jon
-Original Message-
From: Gregory Stark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 8:14 AM
To: pgsql-hackers list
Subject: [HACKERS] Psql command-line completion bug
If you hit tab on a
-Original Message-
On Oracle:
SQL select to_date('31-DEC-200700:00:00', 'dd-mon- hh24:mi:ss') from
dual;
TO_DATE('
-
31-DEC-07
On PostgreSQL:
select to_date('31-DEC-200700:00:00', 'dd-mon- hh24:mi:ss');
to_date
--
200700-12-31
Now the
I always put security definer as I really think that should be the default
behavior. Anyway, your function should run faster.
Jon
-Original Message-
From: Pavel Stehule [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 8:47 AM
To: Roberts, Jon
Cc: Peter Eisentraut; pgsql
Jon,
I always put security definer as I really think that should be the
default behavior. Anyway, your function should run faster.
That's not a real good idea. A security definer function is like an SUID
shell script; only to be used with great care.
You'll have to explain to
Version: PostgreSQL 8.2.5 on i686-pc-mingw32
I recently started getting this error message randomly, could not open
relation 42904/42906/42985: Invalid argument. I also got it for a couple
of other files. All three files are related to tables that have just a
single row each.
I googled the
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 8:18 PM
To: Sean Utt
Cc: Andrew Dunstan; Joshua D. Drake; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Postgresql Materialized views
Sean Utt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My point is
You'll have to explain to Oracle and their customers that Oracle's
security model is not a great idea then.
I'd love to, and in fact *do* whenever I'm given the chance.
In fact, Oracle's security model is pretty bad; the reason why Oracle
advertises Unbreakable so hard is that they
I need to set a basic password policy for accounts but I don't see any
documentation on how to do it. I'm assuming there is a way to do this,
maybe even with a trigger.
The policy would be something like this:
1. Must contain letters and numbers
2. Must be at least 8 characters long
3. Must
-Original Message-
From: D'Arcy J.M. Cain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 9:39 AM
To: Andrew Dunstan
Cc: Roberts, Jon; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Password policy
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:32:12 -0500
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL
I suggest make a distinction between DDL and DML locks. A DDL lock would be
required for a TRUNCATE, CREATE, ALTER, DROP, REPLACE, etc while DML is just
insert, update, and delete.
A TRUNCATE (or any DDL activity) should wait until all DML activity is
committed before it can acquire an exclusive
I really needed this functionality in PostgreSQL. A common use for
autonomous transactions is error logging. I want to log sqlerrm in a
function and raise an exception so the calling application knows there is an
error and I have it logged to a table.
I figured out a way to hack an
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 10:02 -0600, Roberts, Jon wrote:
Maybe someone could enhance this concept to include it with the core
database to provide autonomous transactions.
I agree that autonomous transactions would be useful, but doing them via
dblink is a kludge.
Kludge or hack but I
On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 05:50:02PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
From looking at how Oracle does them, autonomous transactions are
completely independent of the transaction that originates them --
they
take a new database snapshot. This means that
select to_char(date, '-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss.ms') as char,
date
from (select timestamp'2008-01-30 15:06:21.560' as date) sub
2008-01-30 15:06:21.560;2008-01-30 15:06:21.56
Why does the timestamp field truncate the 0 but when I show the
timestamp as a character in the default timestamp
-Original Message-
From: Kevin Grittner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 9:48 AM
To: Roberts, Jon; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] timestamp format bug
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 9:34 AM, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Roberts,
Jon
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 10:48 AM
To: Kevin Grittner
Cc: Roberts, Jon; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] timestamp format bug
Kevin Grittner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008
-Original Message-
From: Kevin Grittner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 12:33 PM
To: Roberts, Jon; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] timestamp format bug
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 12:28 PM, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Roberts,
Jon
-Original Message-
From: Kevin Grittner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:47 PM
To: Roberts, Jon; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] timestamp format bug
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 12:45 PM, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Roberts,
Jon
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:pgsql-hackers-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stephen Frost
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 8:28 AM
To: Amit jain
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Merge condition in postgresql
* Amit jain ([EMAIL
I have no idea why you can't do a subquery in the limit but you can
reference a function:
create table test as select * from pg_tables;
create or replace function fn_count(p_sql varchar) returns int as
$$
declare
v_count int;
begin
execute p_sql into v_count;
return v_count;
end;
$$
Roberts, Jon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have no idea why you can't do a subquery in the limit
It hasn't seemed worth putting any effort into --- AFAIR this is the
first time anyone's even inquired about it. As you say, you can
always
use a function.
And I'm sure someone will point
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:pgsql-hackers-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Magnus Hagander
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 8:36 AM
To: pgsql-hackers
Subject: [HACKERS] Permanent settings
What I'd really like to see is something like a new keyword on the SET
Gregory Stark wrote:
The alternative is to have two files and read them both. Then if you
change a
variable which is overridden by the other source you can warn that
the
change
is ineffective.
I think on balance the include file method is so much simpler that I
prefer it.
I
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Notice that user foo is not a super user. Now I log into
PostgreSQL and connect to the postgres database (the super users
database) as the non privileged user foo. The user foo in theory
has *zero* rights here accept that he can connect.
That's not
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:pgsql-hackers-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Dunstan
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 9:28 AM
To: Tom Lane
Cc: Joshua D. Drake; Greg Sabino Mullane; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Including PL/PgSQL by
I need to run about 1000 PostgreSQL connections on a server that I can
use about 4 GB of the total 16 GB of total RAM. It seems that each
session creates a process that uses about 15 MB of RAM just for
connecting so I'm running out of RAM rather quickly.
I have these non-default settings:
I need to run about 1000 PostgreSQL connections on a server that I
can
use about 4 GB of the total 16 GB of total RAM. It seems that each
session creates a process that uses about 15 MB of RAM just for
connecting so I'm running out of RAM rather quickly.
I think you're being bitten by
I posted earlier about how to tune my server and I think the real
problem is how many connections pgAgent creates for my job needs.
I basically need to run hundreds of jobs daily all to be executed at
4:00 AM. To keep the jobs from killing the other systems, I am
throttling this with a queue
In pgAgent.cpp, I would like to add LIMIT as shown below:
LogMessage(_(Checking for jobs to run), LOG_DEBUG);
DBresult *res=serviceConn-Execute(
wxT(SELECT J.jobid )
wxT( FROM pgagent.pga_job J )
wxT( WHERE jobenabled )
wxT( AND jobagentid IS NULL )
wxT( AND jobnextrun = now() )
wxT(
Roberts, Jon wrote:
In pgAgent.cpp, I would like to add LIMIT as shown below:
[snip]
What do you guys think?
What has this to do with -hackers?
I don't even know what project this refers to - it certainly doesn't
refer to core postgres, which is what -hackers is about
-Original Message-
From: Magnus Hagander [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 8:17 AM
To: Roberts, Jon
Cc: Andrew Dunstan; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pgAgent job limit
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 08:10:09AM -0600, Roberts, Jon wrote
32 matches
Mail list logo
