On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 09:14:48AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
The fact is that if you have 100 columns and want 95 of them, it's
very tedious to have to specify them all, especially for ad hoc
queries where the house SQL standards really don't matter that much.
It's made more tedious by the
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 10:13:52AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 11/01/2011 09:52 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Simon Riggssi...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Why not leave it exactly as it is, and add a previous_query column?
That gives you exactly what you need without breaking anything.
That would
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 02:05:45PM -0500, k...@rice.edu wrote:
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 09:54:07PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On ons, 2011-08-31 at 13:12 -0500, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
Hmm, this thread seems to have petered out without a conclusion. Just
wanted to comment
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 10:14:58PM +0300, Marko Kreen wrote:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 5:46 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Marko Kreen mark...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
... which this approach would create, because digest()
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:15:50AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of mar jun 21 10:04:26 -0400 2011:
2011/6/21 Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com:
Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of mar jun 21 00:59:44 -0400 2011:
yes - it has a sense.
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:20:04AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from Florian Pflug's message of vie jun 17 10:03:56 -0400 2011:
How is that worse than the situation with =~ and ~=?
With =~ it is to the right, with ~= it is to the left.
To throw my user opinion into this ring (as
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 05:21:10PM +0200, Florian Pflug wrote:
On Jun17, 2011, at 17:15 , Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:20:04AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from Florian Pflug's message of vie jun 17 10:03:56 -0400 2011:
How is that worse than the situation
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 09:48:12AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Ross J. Reedstrom reeds...@rice.edu writes:
As an operations guy, the idea of an upgrade using a random,
non-repeatable port selection gives me the hebejeebees.
Yeah, I agree. The latest version
Right, but I think he needs the it's not easy, here's the whole
workflow overview first.
Ross
--
Ross Reedstrom, Ph.D. reeds...@rice.edu
Systems Engineer Admin, Research Scientistphone: 713-348-6166
Connexions http://cnx.org
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 09:14:16PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
Bruce,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
I have researched this and need feedback.
In general, I like the whole idea of using random/special ports for the
duration of the upgrade. I agree that we need to keep the
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 12:53:49PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
I don't have clear feeling on this question in general, but if we're
going to break this up into pieces, it's important that they be
logical pieces. Putting half the feature in core and half into an
extension just because we can
On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 11:22:34AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 1:14 AM, Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com wrote:
No, there's no need to do that. The domain is an array, not merely
something
that can be coerced to an array. Therefore, it can be chosen as the
polymorphic
On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 01:43:16PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
=?utf-8?q?Rados=C5=82aw_Smogura?= rsmog...@softperience.eu writes:
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us Thursday 02 of June 2011 16:42:42
Yes. I think the appropriate problem statement is provide streaming
access to large field values, as an
On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 04:58:36PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I guess the real issue here is that m1.id m2.id has to be evaluated
as a filter condition rather than a join qual.
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 04:19:29PM +0200, Florian Pflug wrote:
Sorry for the self-reply but I figured it'd be helpful to add information
that I discovered only after my initial post.
On May30, 2011, at 15:17 , Florian Pflug wrote:
The XPath expression 'name(/*)', for example, is supposed to
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 11:35:01AM -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org wrote:
This patch allows you to initially declare a CHECK constraint as
NOT VALID, similar to what we already allow for foreign keys.
That is, you create the constraint without
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 01:29:05PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 05/24/2011 04:34 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
I've been looking into a similar refactoring of the names here, where we
bundle all of these speed over safety
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 04:13:12PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue may 19 15:32:57 -0400 2011:
That's a bit of a self-defeating argument though, since it implies
that the effect of taking an exclusive lock via LockSharedObject()
will not simply
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 11:08:40PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
I don't really like the idea of adding a GUC for this, unless we
convince ourselves that nothing else is sensible. I mean, that leads
to conversations like this:
Newbie: My query is slow.
Hacker: Turn on enable_magic_pixie_dust
On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 03:57:12PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Tom this collation stuff has seen more post-feature-commit cleanups than
I think any patch I remember. Is there anything we can learn from this?
How about
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 07:21:16PM +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
On Tuesday, May 10, 2011 07:08:23 PM Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 03:57:12PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Tom this collation stuff has
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 11:16:45AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 2:43 AM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
I think to really address that problem, you need to think about shorter
release cycles overall, like every 6 months.
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 11:00:19PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net
wrote:
On 03/18/2011 09:18 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
all balls seems like a colloquialism best avoided in our
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 09:03:33AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 8:21 AM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
In that case, the last write WAL timestamp would become equal to the
last replay WAL timestamp. So we can see that there is no lag.
Oh, I see (I think).
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 03:45:17PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of lun mar 07 15:16:31 -0300 2011:
If we do that then it becomes worth wondering what the -docs list is for
at all. Maybe we *should* get rid of it; I dunno. I see your point
about how the
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 10:21:28AM +0200, Anssi Kääriäinen wrote:
On 02/02/2011 08:22 PM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
Either one line in the Makefile or a new file with the \i equivalent
lines, that would maybe look like:
SELECT pg_execute_sql_file('upgrade.v14.sql');
SELECT
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 04:31:08PM +0100, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
Ross J. Reedstrom reeds...@rice.edu writes:
Hmm, how about allowing a list of files to execute? That allows the
Sure. I still don't see why doing it in the control file is better than
in the Makefile, even if it's already
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:06:18AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
It makes it very convenient to set up standbys, without having to worry
that you'll conflict e.g with a nightly backup. I don't imagine people
will use streaming base backups for very large databases anyway.
Also, imagine that
On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 05:16:04PM -0500, Robert Treat wrote:
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
However, I don't see why we need (column_list). Surely the index has a
column list already?
ALTER TABLE table_name ADD CONSTRAINT pk_name PRIMARY KEY USING
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 04:57:03PM +0900, KaiGai Kohei wrote:
(2010/11/18 2:17), Robert Haas wrote:
If KaiGai updates the code per previous discussion, would you be
willing to take a crack at adding documentation?
P.S. Your email client seems to be setting the Reply-To address to a
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 09:41:37PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 8:15 PM, KaiGai Kohei kai...@ak.jp.nec.com wrote:
If we don't need a PoC module for each new hooks, I'm not strongly
motivated to push it into contrib tree.
How about your opinion?
I'd say let it go,
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 04:20:12PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
Just for the record, I've never ever met anyone that said Oh, this \d
syntax makes so much sense. I'm a real convert to Postgres now you've
shown me this. The reaction is always the opposite one; always
negative. Which detracts
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 01:19:57PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
I'm not sure. What does seem clear is that it's fundamentally at odds
with the admission control approach Kevin is advocating. When you
start to run short on a resource (perhaps memory), you have to decide
between (a) waiting for
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 01:25:33PM -0700, David E. Wheeler wrote:
On Jun 15, 2010, at 1:12 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
This was just posted to announce. Seems the community now has to
compete with another extension-based infrastructure if we ever get
around to developing one of our own.
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 03:42:59PM -0700, David E. Wheeler wrote:
On Jun 15, 2010, at 3:22 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I totaly agreed you need funding, and you are very well qualified to do
this, and it is a badly needed facility.
Thanks.
The problem I had is that the effort appeared
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 01:35:32PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
deleted,
or on a reporting read-only clone of your database which gets
recreated very
night and is not used for failover. High quality hardware alone
s/very/every/
or
s/very night/periodically/
Ross
--
Ross
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 08:18:13PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Kjell Rune Skaaraas kjell...@yahoo.no
wrote:
[snip]
I saw some indications that this might be a minority opinion, well I would
like to cast a vote FOR this functionality. The workarounds are ugly,
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 10:58:40AM -0500, Terry Brown wrote:
I asked on IRC if there was any way to make \d behave like \d+ by default,
and davidfetter said no but suggest it here.
endpoint_david pointed out you could use \d- to get the old behavior if you
wanted to temporarily negate the
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:34:41PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Matthew Altus wrote:
Hey,
After dealing with a production fault and having to rollback all the time,
I
kept typing a different word instead of rollback. So I created a patch to
accept this word as an alias for
On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 05:08:05PM +0100, Yeb Havinga wrote:
Little, Douglas wrote:
Hi,
Is there a PG command or fuction that will return table ddl?
If you just want the definition,in psql type \d tablename.
To dump ddl the pg_dump with proper arguments can dump just the ddl of a
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 07:01:19PM +0200, Priit Laes wrote:
It might avoid the 'UU, I forgot to enable python support.',
after you have waited a while for the build to finish...
+1 from me, for that very reason!
Ross
--
Ross Reedstrom, Ph.D.
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 06:06:53PM +0200, Alastair Bell Turner wrote:
..
without having to add a switch to their command lines. It's not going
to have anything to say to experienced psql users anyway so it would
probably not bug anyone enough to turn it off.
I would so use this feature going
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 10:49:55AM -0600, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 06:06:53PM +0200, Alastair Bell Turner wrote:
..
without having to add a switch to their command lines. It's not going
to have anything to say to experienced psql users anyway so it would
probably
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 05:03:33PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Spelling out primary key would seem to be more in keeping with existing
entries in that column, eg we have not null not NN.
I think this is a sensible
On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 10:49:13AM +, Dave Page wrote:
On behalf of the core team, I'm pleased to announce that the
Congratulations!
+1 Congrats to you all, and thanks for the contributions, both past and
future.
As an aside, this sort of thing is one of the best signs to an external
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 03:12:43PM +0900, KaiGai Kohei wrote:
Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
* CREATE TABLE tbl (col integer AS SECURITY_CONTEXT = '...')
Is the syntax AS SECURITY_CONTEXT natural in English?
We need to put a reserved token, such as AS, prior to the SECURITY_CONTEXT
to avoid
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 05:15:05PM -0700, u235sentinel wrote:
Does anyone have a link for pl/ruby? I found a link under the postgres
documentation and found a web site from there talking about the code.
However when I clicked on the link to download it I noticed ftp wouldn't
respond on
On Sat, Sep 25, 2004 at 11:14:53AM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
Jim C. Nasby
Fair questions. MVCC has been tightly locked into Postgres/SQL for the whole
of its history. There is much written on this and you should search some
more - references are in the manual.
Well, not quite it's whole
On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 10:12:53PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Another discussion was about binary files in the tree (not being source
files - the source is a binary .AI file (AFAIK that's Adobe
Illustrator)). The question was raised wether ImageMagick could do
On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 01:18:02AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Maybe a better SCM could help with this, but I doubt it.
I haven't seen any particular reason why we should adopt another SCM.
Perhaps BitKeeper or SubVersion would be better for our
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 11:04:03PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
There is still barely enough time to do the long-threatened protocol
revision for 7.4, if we suck it up and get started on that now. I've
been avoiding the issue myself, because it seems generally boring and
thankless work, but maybe
of application of tzset()
vs. table lookup?
Ross
On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 03:34:56PM -0600, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 08:39:12PM -0600, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
Every other validly formatted TZ variable that returns GMT should be
caught be the datetktbl check
On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 08:39:12PM -0600, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
Every other validly formatted TZ variable that returns GMT should be
caught be the datetktbl check.
I'll play with it this weekend, see how hard it is to make it work.
O.K., the weekend's over, And I've created two
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 04:19:21PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Ross J. Reedstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 03:21:09PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Provide a portable way of getting libc to tell us whether it likes TZ,
and I'll be glad to fix this.
Dang that lovely word
On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 05:45:53PM -0600, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 06:15:31PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Ross J. Reedstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
snip
I'm worried about cases like Africa/Benin for places that just happen
to be on the prime meridian, but don't call
On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 06:15:31PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Ross J. Reedstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
snip
I'm worried about cases like Africa/Benin for places that just happen
to be on the prime meridian, but don't call their time GMT or UTC.
Looking at a globe, it also seems possible
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 03:21:09PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Ross J. Reedstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
question about pgsql's time zone parsers. It appears there's at least
two, since SET TIME ZONE accepts strings like 'US/Eastern', while general
timestamp parsing doesn't:
The TIME ZONE
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 10:35:58PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
snip Tom discussion backend internal tracking of timezone
Any objections?
Not to your suggestion per se, but looking at the bug report raises a
question about pgsql's time zone parsers. It appears there's at least
two, since SET TIME
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 03:10:19PM -0600, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 11:32:02AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Patrick Welche [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 10:25:52AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Well, is that a bug in your wrapper? Or must we add a configure
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:05:20AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Ross J. Reedstrom writes:
I don't think this is what we were out for. We've certainly been running
with libedit for a long time without anyone ever mentioning
/usr/include/editline. I suggest this part is taken out.
Well, I
On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 01:34:34AM +0100, Ian Barwick wrote:
On Sunday 16 February 2003 01:10, Rod Taylor wrote:
I've been debating a mechanism which could build tab completion tables
based on the documentation for a while now -- and was going to give it a
try next week. If it works, that
On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 10:03:28AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Curt Sampson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I object. I personally think we should be moving towards not using OIDs
as the default behaviour, inasmuch as we can, for several reasons:
All these objections are global in nature, not
On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 11:38:24AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
A small difficulty is that explicitly-specified sysids could conflict
with sysids generated later by the sequence. We could perhaps fix this
by forcing up the sequence setting to be at least as large as an
On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 11:17:42AM -0500, Jeff wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, mlw wrote:
So with all that, you gotta appreciate both sides - hte fact pg just
works and the tunability of bigger db's (Oh yeah - and we've actually had
informix on the horn about the problem - their solution was
On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 12:23:59PM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
No, I mean that we don't drop the user. You go:
ALTER USER chriskl COPY PERMISSIONS FROM blah;
That seems cleaner to me than the DROP thingy.
You could only
On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 11:59:33AM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
Tom Lane writes:
Feel free to contribute some code.
I will, but unfortunately the damage has already been done...since I have to
support 7.3 anyway, fixing the above problem will actually make my life
harder, not
On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 10:01:38AM -0500, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Dan Langille wrote:
On 13 Jan 2003 at 9:45, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FTP is just over 800MB, plan for growth.
WEB is just over 90MB, can't tell
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 11:02:55PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Ross J. Reedstrom writes:
I already posted a one-line patch to implement this, but it doesn't
seem to hve come through to the list. Here it is inline, instead of as
an attachment:
We need this to work without readline
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 10:49:33PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Christopher Kings-Lynne writes:
Is there any way of making the 'up' arrow retrieve all of the last multiline
query, instead of just the last line?
There is nothing technical that should prevent you from implementing it.
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 07:15:34AM +, Peter Mount wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Tom Lane writes:
The case I find interesting is where you're using plain \e to
re-edit a query interactively. If this query never gets into the
history buffer then you're
On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 07:26:06PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Lamar Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
replies I will rather quickly redirect to /dev/null, as it isn't Red Hat's
fault we can't do a sane upgrade.
I think you're wasting your time trying to hold us to a higher standard
of
On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 01:52:01PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Found SQL/MED, Section 21 of ISO 9075-9.
That's the old version, though. The new draft is at (digs out article)
http://sqlstandards.org/SC32/WG3/Progression_Documents/FCD/4FCD1-14-XML-2002-03.pdf
On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 01:52:01PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Found SQL/MED, Section 21 of ISO 9075-9.
That's the old version, though. The new draft is at (digs out article)
http://sqlstandards.org/SC32/WG3/Progression_Documents/FCD/4FCD1-14-XML-2002-03.pdf
I've tested this under 7.3, and it works beautifully for the cases I've
built over the last 2 days. I can no longer bugger a plan up mearly
by reordering the WHERE clauses. Note that 2 of the five parts won't
patch in (involving constantqual). Looks to be code refactoring between
here and
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 02:40:40AM -0500, Mike Mascari wrote:
Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
For this query, the difference is 160 ms vs. 2 sec. Any reason for this
change?
I could be way off base, but here's a shot in the dark:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=enlr=ie=UTF-8oe=UTF-8threadm
it.
Ross
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 09:28:38AM +0100, Tommi Maekitalo wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 13. November 2002 07:22 schrieb Ross J. Reedstrom:
Hey Hackers -
...
CREATE VIEW current_modules AS
SELECT * FROM modules m
WHERE module_ident =
(SELECT
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 08:58:04AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Ross J. Reedstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bingo, that solved it. I'm back to 160 ms. What does Tom feel about
removing this? Is there some way the planner could have known which
was the smarter/faster order of application?
As I
Hey Hackers -
I was testing beta5 and found a performance regression involving
application of constraints into a VIEW - I've got a view that is fairly
expensive, involving a subselet and an aggregate. When the query is
rewritten in 7.2.3, the toplevel constraint is used to filter before
the
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 05:02:14PM +0900, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Exactly. When user send the COMMIT command to the master server, the
master.talks to the slaves to process precommit-vote-commit using the
2PC. The 2PC cycle is hidden from user
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 08:54:46PM +0900, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In protocol-layer 2PC, no new SQL command is required.
A precommit-vote-commit phase will be called implicitly. It means an
user application can be used without any
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 08:10:29PM -0500, Mike Mascari wrote:
Actually, I was thinking along the lines of a true CREATE
DATABASE LINK implementation, where multiple databases could
participate in a distributed transaction. That would require the
backend in which the main query is
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 10:59:39PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
What's the basis for your assertion that it's planning things that
don't need it? Given a JOIN-constrained query I do not believe the
planner will look at any cases other than the intended join order.
Well, that was a loose choice of
Ah, so Ben finally got around to posting here. Ben's a CS Grad student
here at Rice. His (current) project involves taking some interesting
results from constraint satisfaction and implementing them on a database:
one of the CS faculty has demonstrated that one class of highly joined
DB queries
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 03:59:33AM -0400, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Gavin Sherry wrote:
Hi all,
It occurs to me that opening web page on www.postgresql.org, asking the
user to select the mirror, is rather unprofessional. I am sure this has
been discussed before but
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 11:26:55AM -0400, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
I'd suggest setting a cookie, so I only see the 'pick a mirror' the
first time. And provide a link to 'pick a different mirror' that resets
or ignores the cookie.
Or choose
On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 04:57:30PM +0200, Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote:
Have you seen my example ? If calculated in float4 the result of
1.01*1000.0-1000.0 would be 0.0, no ?
So? If you are storing one input as float4, then you cannot rationally
say that you
On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 10:30:51AM -0500, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
Ah, sorry to drag this on, then. But this is one of those clear cases
were we must fo the right thing, not follow the crowd. PostgreSQL gets
do
used by a lot of scientific projects (Have you noticed all the big
On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 06:00:37PM +0200, Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote:
What if he must display 9 digits and says the result is approximately 2.45678932
would that be worse than 2.4600 ?
Yup. Trailing zeros are not significant. That's why scientific notation is nice:
you don't fill
On Wed, Sep 18, 2002 at 08:01:42PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Second, when you unlink() a file on Win32, do applications continue
accessing the old file contents if they had the file open before the
unlink?
I'm pretty sure it errors with 'file in use'. Pretty ugly, huh?
Ross
On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 01:56:19PM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
*sigh*
Well, at least they have an easy and fast upgrade process ;)
Right, fewer pesky features to get in the way of the upgrade ;-
Ross
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP
On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 11:30:52AM -0700, Dann Corbit wrote:
I suspect it'll be several more major releases before we
begin to consider it approaching completely functional.
I believe that the surprise is at the focus, when it comes to a release.
With commercial products (anyway) if
On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 10:23:02AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
I really like Hannu's idea of storing an entire (single-inheritance)
hierarchy in a single file.
Wouldn't this require solving the ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN (to parent)
column ordering problem?
I guess the question we need to ask
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 02:43:38PM -0400, Matthew T. OConnor wrote:
As someone else mentioned (I think), even using a separate schema is not
always an acceptable option. If you are using a packaged application
(whether commercial or open source), you usually don't want *any*
changes to
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 06:08:40PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But we should have some default to print some of the query,
Why? So far you've been told by two different people (make that three
now) that such a behavior is useless, and no one's weighed in
On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 11:28:32AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Nigel J. Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But going back to the idea that it seems that the only problem being
publicised in the 'outside world' is the cash_out(2) version can we
not do the restriction on acceptable input type in
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 10:21:12AM -0400, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
RPMs aren't a good enough reason to put it in. All features aren't
installed in an RPM, why would this need to? Besides, anything that
is runtime configurable can end up getting its default changed on a
whim. Then again as
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 11:59:20AM +0300, Oleg Bartunov wrote:
tsearch has compiled-in stop-list, it's currently just not flexible
as OpenFTS does. We plan to move most functionality to tsearch but
currently have no time. Feel free to join us to speedup tsearch
development.
Oleg -
I think
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 11:05:07AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I think we are going to see more company-funded developers working on
PostgreSQL. There are a handful now, but I can see lots more coming.
I am going to work on getting those funding companies more visibility.
We originally were
On Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 09:39:06AM -0500, Greg Copeland wrote:
On Tue, 2002-08-13 at 23:43, Curt Sampson wrote:
Just my opinion of course, but I think it would be best to have a
detailed description of how everything in inheritance is supposed to
work, write a set of tests from that, and
On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 11:19:40PM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
i spoke w/jan some time ago (in a hurry now -- have to call salvation army
to have them pick up my couch!).
i need to jump in an discuss/get an assignment off the todo list. i am a cs
doctoral student at gmu in va.
1 - 100 of 178 matches
Mail list logo
