Andrew Dunstan wrote:
...
Can someone please give a good, concrete use case for this stuff? Might
be nice to have doesn't cut it, I'm afraid. In particular, I'd like to
know why logging statements won't do the trick here.
Please pardon the kibbitzer intrusion ...
Informix has this
Greg Smith wrote
On Fri, 16 May 2008, Josh Berkus wrote:
For a hard-core benchmark, I'd try EAStress (SpecJAppserver Lite)
This reminds me...Jignesh had some interesting EAStress results at the
East conference I was curious to try and replicate more publicly one day.
Now that there
Nick wrote:
I have a VIEW that consists of two tables, of which contain a POINT
column. When trying to select from the view I get an error...
ERROR: could not identify an ordering operator for type point
HINT: Use an explicit ordering operator or modify the query.
Any suggestions???
In further OT Gregory Stark wrote:
Shane Ambler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Robert Treat wrote:
So is that a golf club gun?
Careful what you wish for
http://www.totallyabsurd.com/12gaugegolfclub.htm
I reckon they watched Caddyshack (I think that
David Fetter wrote
...
This'd greatly simplify the
cleanup-dead-objects problem, and we could avoid addressing the
permissions problem at all, since regular SQL permissions on the table
would serve fine. But it's not clear what regular SQL fetch and update
behaviors should be like
Sorry for top-posting -- challenged reader.
Perhaps a future addition as \L ?
This command doesn't seem to be used and could be documented as being subject
to permissions and slower.
I actually would find this useful, but there are other ways of getting it. But
having the option would be nice
FWIW,
Please do tests of at least 2 minutes duration. A 1.25 second test isn't
enough. Please confirm you have VACUUM ANALYZED each db beforehand.
Have you checked that the EXPLAIN ANALYZEs are essentially identical
also? Is the data identical on both systems?
I've been running some
Robert Haas wrote:
Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com writes:
When I set it up, it automatically appended the time so I got:
postgresql.log.1231878270
That seems a bit, well wrong. If I say I want postgresql.log I should
get postgresql.log.
You'd probably reconsider around the
