Re: [GENERAL] storing a tree-like structure and selecting pathfrom leaf to root
At 09:44 +0300 on 15/08/1999, Jan Vicherek wrote: > Q1: What is a good way to store this tree in ? (This is somewhat generic > question, so it may be a good FAQ candidate.) I want SELECTs to be fast, > and INSERTs/UPDATEs I don't care. Would making custom datatype help ? How? About a year and a half ago, there was a book recommendation about this issue. The book discusses advanced data structures representation with SQL. Now that PostgreSQL has subqueries and unions, it becomes more relevant. The book was: Joe Celko's SQL for Smarties Advanced SQL Programming The publisher: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc 340 Pine St 6th Floor San Francisco CA 94104-33205 USA 415-392-2665 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mkp.com The original poster of this recommendation was Terry Harple, and it was on the (now defunct) QUESTIONS list. Herouth -- Herouth Maoz, Internet developer. Open University of Israel - Telem project http://telem.openu.ac.il/~herutma
[GENERAL] Regression issues
When I run regression tests on Postgres 6.5.1 installed on Redhat 5.2 I get the following results: geometry, tinterval, and abstime fail. Numeric hangs; it gives no result. There is some problem regarding the date, Sat Aug 15 10:17:28 2020 The expected vs. actual results are: *** expected/geometry.out Sun Dec 13 18:49:18 1998 --- results/geometry.out Sat Aug 15 10:17:28 2020 *** expected/tinterval.out Wed Oct 28 23:29:12 1998 --- results/tinterval.out Sat Aug 15 10:17:37 2020 *** expected/abstime.out Sun Jan 4 22:35:19 1998 --- results/abstime.out Sat Aug 15 10:17:36 2020 I might point out that I had to use the C compiler. It would not compile with C++.. I suppose there also could be some lurking Y2K problem somewhere. I would appreciate any feedback on this issue. Regards, Duncan C. Kinder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[GENERAL] User not in pg_shadow
I have installed postgresql 6.5.1 on a Redhat Linux 5.2 box. As "postgres" I am able to create a database. However, when I type the command "createdb whatever" as dckinder, I receive the following response: "Connection to database 'templete1' failed FATAL 1: SetUserId: user 'dckinder' is not in 'pg_shadow'. How do I get dckinder to be in 'pg_shadow'? Thanks in advance. Duncan C. Kinder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[GENERAL] Autoincremental
Pgsql support autoincremental field like mysql ? Thanks
Re: [GENERAL] Autoincremental
Yes, it's called "serial" IE:
create table my table (
ndx serial,
nametext
);
"serial" is just a shortcut that creates a "sequence" (a type that is
basically a counter) an sets the ndx field to be an int default
nextval('sequence_name') Read the FAQ for a better explanation.
At 01:44 PM 8/15/99, Matteo Colombo wrote:
>Pgsql support autoincremental field like mysql ?
>
>Thanks
>
Re: [GENERAL] User not in pg_shadow
As the postgres user run the program "createuser" It will ask fro a username (dckinder) and some other things, including whether the user can create a database. You can do the same thing by connecting to template1 with psql and using the CREATE USER command. (do \h CREATE USER from within psql) At 04:00 PM 8/15/99, Duncan Kinder wrote: >I have installed postgresql 6.5.1 on a Redhat Linux 5.2 box. > >As "postgres" I am able to create a database. > >However, when I type the command "createdb whatever" as dckinder, I receive >the following response: > >"Connection to database 'templete1' failed >FATAL 1: SetUserId: user 'dckinder' is not in 'pg_shadow'. > >How do I get dckinder to be in 'pg_shadow'? > >Thanks in advance. > >Duncan C. Kinder >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > >
Re: [GENERAL] User not in pg_shadow
Duncan Kinder wrote: > I have installed postgresql 6.5.1 on a Redhat Linux 5.2 box. > > As "postgres" I am able to create a database. > > However, when I type the command "createdb whatever" as dckinder, I receive > the following response: > > "Connection to database 'templete1' failed > FATAL 1: SetUserId: user 'dckinder' is not in 'pg_shadow'. > > How do I get dckinder to be in 'pg_shadow'? Use the program createuser as user postgres. Type man createuser for explanation. -- ~~~ Herbert LiechtiE-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ThinX networked business services Stahlrain 10, CH-5200 Brugg ~~~
Re: [GENERAL] User not in pg_shadow
"Duncan Kinder" wrote: >I have installed postgresql 6.5.1 on a Redhat Linux 5.2 box. > >As "postgres" I am able to create a database. > >However, when I type the command "createdb whatever" as dckinder, I receive >the following response: > >"Connection to database 'templete1' failed >FATAL 1: SetUserId: user 'dckinder' is not in 'pg_shadow'. > >How do I get dckinder to be in 'pg_shadow'? As postgres, createuser dckinder -- Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/ Oliver Elphick[EMAIL PROTECTED] Isle of Wight http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver PGP key from public servers; key ID 32B8FAA1 "Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints." Ephesians 6:18
[GENERAL] Are there any limits on index size?
Folks, I have a 40 million record database (about 40GB and growing) and I notice that some of my multicolumn indices are beginning to approach 2GB on disk. Will there be any problems spanning the 32 bit limit here (a la tables in version 6.4)? Thanks! --Martin === Martin Weinberg Phone: (413) 545-3821 Dept. of Physics and Astronomy FAX: (413) 545-2117/0648 530 Graduate Research Tower University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003-4525
[GENERAL] [Fwd: Maximum filesize of one file]
> I have a 40 million record database (about 40GB and growing) and I > notice that some of my multicolumn indices are beginning to approach > 2GB on disk. > > Will there be any problems spanning the 32 bit limit here (a la tables > in version 6.4)? Please refer to the attached messages from [EMAIL PROTECTED] CN Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from nic.funet.fi (nic.funet.fi [128.214.248.6]) by mail.sinyih.com.tw (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA19559 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 14 Mar 1999 17:57:56 +0800 Received: from vger.rutgers.edu ([128.6.190.2]:49714 "EHLO vger.rutgers.edu" ident: "NO-IDENT-SERVICE[2]") by nic.funet.fi with ESMTP id <10060-29820>; Sun, 14 Mar 1999 03:56:04 +0200 Received: by vger.rutgers.edu via listexpand id <160871-212>; Sat, 13 Mar 1999 20:56:57 -0500 Received: by vger.rutgers.edu id <160865-215>; Sat, 13 Mar 1999 20:56:53 -0500 Received: from pop.uniserve.com ([204.244.156.3]:3119 "HELO pop.uniserve.com" ident: "NO-IDENT-SERVICE[2]") by vger.rutgers.edu with SMTP id <160864-215>; Sat, 13 Mar 1999 20:56:06 -0500 Received: from shell.uniserve.ca [204.244.186.218] by pop.uniserve.com with smtp (Exim 1.82 #4) id 10M066-0001xz-00; Sat, 13 Mar 1999 17:53:46 -0800 Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 17:53:43 -0800 (PST) From: Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Matti Aarnio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Dietmar Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Maximum filesize of one file In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-raid-outgoing X-Mozilla-Status2: On Thu, 11 Mar 1999, Matti Aarnio wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dietmar Stein) asked: > > Hi guys, > > > > not really the topic - I know - but I read that the maximum size of one > > file is currently 2GB on linux like on other operating systems (e.g > > HP-UX supports filesizes above 2GB but HP does not take support for it). > > > > Is there a way to increase the size for testing? I was looking for a > > parameter in the kernel like ulimit but didn't find until now. Can > > someone tell me how to change/increase? > > With Linux 2.0 kernel series at 32-bit systems (e.g. i386) > the answer is: 2G is absolute limit, period. > > The longer answer contains the size limit explanations > which are available at 64-bit systems (for 2.0 just Alpha > machines). See files at ftp://mea.tmt.tele.fi/linux/LFS/ > > At the above mentioned place there is also patch for the kernel > to support sizes over 2G at 32-bit platforms, however they > are not fully ready to be used quite yet -- some issues are > still open regarding glibc 2.1 support syncing. I don't know about this. I believe the primary issue is support for > 2GB files is a design limiation in ext2fs. I don't think it has anything to do with the architecture. Supposedly, ext3fs will fix this. For example, FreeBSD has support > 2GB because it uses UFS, and UFS supports > 2GB files. I understand that UFS is available for Linux too, and when you use it, you get > 2GB files too. I also understand that other non-ext2fs filesystems for Linux > 2GB files too. Tom Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from nic.funet.fi (nic.funet.fi [128.214.248.6]) by mail.sinyih.com.tw (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA19574 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 14 Mar 1999 18:36:17 +0800 Received: from vger.rutgers.edu ([128.6.190.2]:18512 "EHLO vger.rutgers.edu" ident: "NO-IDENT-SERVICE[2]") by nic.funet.fi with ESMTP id <10167-6944>; Sun, 14 Mar 1999 04:33:47 +0200 Received: by vger.rutgers.edu via listexpand id <160367-215>; Sat, 13 Mar 1999 21:34:55 -0500 Received: by vger.rutgers.edu id <157678-212>; Sat, 13 Mar 1999 21:34:48 -0500 Received: from mea.tmt.tele.fi ([194.252.70.162]:1124 "EHLO mea.tmt.tele.fi" ident: "IDENT-NONSENSE") by vger.rutgers.edu with ESMTP id <160249-212>; Sat, 13 Mar 1999 21:34:30 -0500 Received: by mea.tmt.tele.fi id <92257-406>; Sun, 14 Mar 1999 04:30:58 +0200 Subject: Re: Maximum filesize of one file In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> from Tom at "Mar 13, 99 05:53:43 pm" To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom) Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 04:30:58 +0200 (EET) Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Matti Aarnio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Phone: +358-20402082 (office, with redirection to cellular) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-raid-outgoing X-Mozilla-Status2: Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pronouncedth: > On Thu, 11 Mar 1999, Matti Aarnio wrote: > > With Linux 2.0 kernel series at 32-bit systems (e.g. i386) > > the answer is: 2G is absol
