RROR: permission denied for relation lock_tbl5
> STATEMENT: LOCK TABLE lock_tbl5 IN access EXCLUSIVE MODE;
> ERROR: permission denied for relation lock_tbl5
No problem.
LOCK * locks only the descendants, so tbl5 is not locked since it is
not a decendant of tbl6.
--
Simon Rigg
lint check (mybool in (0, 1))
You can use "char" also, but the syntax is less clear.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
--
Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql
ared and we
didn't complete it in time for the dev deadline.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
--
Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql
inherent delay. I think
PostgreSQL adoption is mostly held back by operational features, like
performance management, locking, backup.
But we're mainly constrained on people's time, i.e. money. And AFAICS
nothing like this is going to happen in this release.
--
Simon Riggs www.
specific periods of time.
>
> Isn't this exactly what Alvaro describes? The time travel feature that was
> removed because it made Postgres too slow to use in production?
Similar. Performance is the issue to be solved with row removal, yes.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.
ots, if there is a gap. At the
moment we never remove rows beyond global xmin, but we could iff the
transactions at xmin promise never to update data. That should go on the
TODO list as a precursor. Some discussion required :-)
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Serv
On Sat, 2008-07-12 at 09:40 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 8:56 AM, Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Please don't put links to copyrighted material on our lists.
>
> That's an odd thing to say, given that virtually every l
Like I said: you cannot rollback a single transaction after commit.
Please don't put links to copyrighted material on our lists.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
--
Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org)
To mak
ead of the reality.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
--
Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql
until the table is unlocked.
> Each process updates different parts of the table.
Your ranges overlap. So one waits for the other on tuple=5001.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
--
Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresq
this query, which is
otherwise an unconstrained join on both sides of the OR. Great example
of a query which runs slow because the question is phrased incorrectly.
Count(distinct) is pretty much the only function that will give the same
answer as a correctly phrased query.
--
Simon Riggs
would at least plug
the gap, but thats not a great planand I'm not suggesting it.)
So the main gap in all of this is the lack of a TRUNCATE trigger,
probably also the lack of a specific TRUNCATE privilege as well.
--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
come objections.
Yes, it does look fairly straightforward. Should be ready for when 8.4
opens, assuming we agree.
--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
bobstable;
>
> Would be nice if they saw this:
> WeeklySalesSomeStrangeName
> ------
...
> Producing "?column?" or somesuch to use in the report, it could return a
> title like "sum(WeeklySales)"
That would be just great
14 matches
Mail list logo
