Dear Friends,
How to insert or update a file in a table using the query in postgres
CREATE TABLE excel_file_upload
(
user_id integer,
excel_file bytea
}
example
insert into excel_file_upload values(1,file1)
file1 can be any file *.doc,*.xls
How i can do this(with out using java or an
Dear Friends,
How to insert or update a file in a table using the query in postgres
CREATE TABLE excel_file_upload
(
user_id integer,
excel_file bytea
}
example
insert into excel_file_upload values(1,file1)
file1 can be any file *.doc,*.xls
How i can do this(with out using java or
Greg Smith wrote:
What I'd love to have is a way to rent a fairly serious piece of
dedicated hardware, ideally with multiple (at least 4) hard drives in
a RAID configuration and a battery-backed write cache. The cache is
negotiable. Linux would be preferred, FreeBSD or Solaris would also
work
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Craig James wrote:
> Greg Smith wrote:
>>
>> What I'd love to have is a way to rent a fairly serious piece of dedicated
>> hardware, ideally with multiple (at least 4) hard drives in a RAID
>> configuration and a battery-backed write cache. The cache is negotiable
Greg Smith wrote:
> I keep falling into situations where it would be nice to host a server
> somewhere else. Virtual host solutions and the mysterious cloud are no
> good for the ones I run into though, as disk performance is important
> for all the applications I have to deal with.
It's worth no
On Tue, 26 May 2009, Scott Marlowe wrote:
Plus if you only need 4 drives or something, you can do pretty well with
a Dell with the RAID controller turned to JBOD and letting the linux
kernel do the RAID work.
I think most of the apps I'm considering would be OK with 4 drives and a
useful wri
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Scott Carey wrote:
>> Yeah, the OP would be much better served ordering a server with an
>> Areca or Escalade / 3ware controller setup and ready to go, shipped to
>> the hosting center and sshing in and doing the rest than letting a
>> hosted solution company try
On 5/26/09 7:27 PM, "Scott Carey" wrote:
>
> For a permanent server, yes. But for a sort lease? You have to go with
Ahem ... 'short' not 'sort'.
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org
On 5/26/09 6:52 PM, "Scott Marlowe" wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 7:41 PM, Scott Carey wrote:
>>
>> On 5/26/09 6:17 PM, "Greg Smith" wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 26 May 2009, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>>
CMD doesn't rent hardware you would have to provide that, Rack Space
does.
>>>
>>>
2009/5/26 Tom Lane :
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
>> However I think there's a bigger problem here, which is that if the user
>> has set naptime too low, i.e. to a value lower than
>> number-of-databases * 100ms, we'll be running the (expensive)
>> rebuild_database_list function on each iteration ...
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 7:41 PM, Scott Carey wrote:
>
> On 5/26/09 6:17 PM, "Greg Smith" wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 26 May 2009, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>
>>> CMD doesn't rent hardware you would have to provide that, Rack Space
>>> does.
>>
>> Part of the idea was to avoid buying a stack of servers, if
On 5/26/09 6:17 PM, "Greg Smith" wrote:
> On Tue, 26 May 2009, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>> CMD doesn't rent hardware you would have to provide that, Rack Space
>> does.
>
> Part of the idea was to avoid buying a stack of servers, if this were just
> a "where do I put the boxes at?" problem I'd
Greg,
I keep falling into situations where it would be nice to host a server
somewhere else. Virtual host solutions and the mysterious cloud are no
good for the ones I run into though, as disk performance is important
for all the applications I have to deal with.
Joyent will guarentee you a ce
On Tue, 26 May 2009, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
CMD doesn't rent hardware you would have to provide that, Rack Space
does.
Part of the idea was to avoid buying a stack of servers, if this were just
a "where do I put the boxes at?" problem I'd have just asked you about it
already. I forgot to ch
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> However I think there's a bigger problem here, which is that if the user
> has set naptime too low, i.e. to a value lower than
> number-of-databases * 100ms, we'll be running the (expensive)
> rebuild_database_list function on each iteration ... maybe we oughta put
> a low
On 5/26/09, Greg Smith wrote:
> I keep falling into situations where it would be nice to host a server
> somewhere else. Virtual host solutions and the mysterious cloud are no
> good for the ones I run into though, as disk performance is important for
> all the applications I have to deal with.
>
Tom Lane escribió:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > Tom Lane escribi�:
> >> Hmm, maybe we need to improve the code too. This example suggests that
> >> there needs to be some limit on the worker launch rate, even if there
> >> are so many databases that that means we don't meet naptime exactly.
>
>
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Tom Lane escribió:
>> Hmm, maybe we need to improve the code too. This example suggests that
>> there needs to be some limit on the worker launch rate, even if there
>> are so many databases that that means we don't meet naptime exactly.
> We already have a 100ms lower b
Tom Lane escribió:
> Hmm, maybe we need to improve the code too. This example suggests that
> there needs to be some limit on the worker launch rate, even if there
> are so many databases that that means we don't meet naptime exactly.
We already have a 100ms lower bound on the sleep time (see
la
On Tue, 2009-05-26 at 17:51 -0400, Greg Smith wrote:
> I keep falling into situations where it would be nice to host a server
> somewhere else. Virtual host solutions and the mysterious cloud are no
> good for the ones I run into though, as disk performance is important for
> all the applicatio
Depends on the level of facility you are looking for. Peer1 (www.peer1.com)
will sell you just about whatever you need contained in a single box and I
believe their Atlanta facility and some others have a managed SAN option.
Since you want a customized solution, make sure you talk with one of thei
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 11:51 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> I keep falling into situations where it would be nice to host a server
> somewhere else. Virtual host solutions and the mysterious cloud are no good
> for the ones I run into though, as disk performance is important for all the
> applications
Greg Smith wrote:
What I'd love to have is a way to rent a fairly serious piece of
dedicated hardware, ideally with multiple (at least 4) hard drives in a
RAID configuration and a battery-backed write cache. The cache is
negotiable. Linux would be preferred, FreeBSD or Solaris would also
work
I keep falling into situations where it would be nice to host a server
somewhere else. Virtual host solutions and the mysterious cloud are no
good for the ones I run into though, as disk performance is important for
all the applications I have to deal with.
What I'd love to have is a way to r
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Sorry, it's the other way around actually -- correct for 8.3 onwards,
> wrong for 8.1 and 8.2. In the earlier versions, it would do one run in
> a chosen database, sleep during "naptime", then do another run.
> Tom Lane escribió:
>> I suppose the use of "minimum" means
W dniu 26 maja 2009 20:28 użytkownik Tom Lane napisał:
>>> I believe the interpretation of autovacuum_naptime is that it should
>>> examine each database that often, ie once a minute by default. So
>>> it's got more than 30 databases per second to look through.
>
>> Note that this is correct in 8
Tom Lane escribió:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > Tom Lane escribi�:
> >> I believe the interpretation of autovacuum_naptime is that it should
> >> examine each database that often, ie once a minute by default. So
> >> it's got more than 30 databases per second to look through.
>
> > Note that thi
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Tom Lane escribió:
>> I believe the interpretation of autovacuum_naptime is that it should
>> examine each database that often, ie once a minute by default. So
>> it's got more than 30 databases per second to look through.
> Note that this is correct in 8.1 and 8.2 but n
Tom Lane escribió:
> =?UTF-8?B?xYF1a2FzeiBKYWdpZcWCxYJv?= writes:
> > That autovacuum working hole time, shoudn't be run only when db needs ?
>
> With 2000 databases to cycle through, autovac is going to be spending
> quite a lot of time just finding out whether it needs to do anything.
> I belie
Well for one thing on the IODrive. Be sure to use a FS that supports direct IO
so you don't cache it on the FS level and thus take room an object not on SSD
could use. We use vxfs with mincache=direct as our filesystem for just this
reason. Also, there is an IO drive tuning manual that discus
30 matches
Mail list logo
