Hi,
Bhaskar Sirohi wrote:
> ...
2008-07-30 15:05:01 EDT LOG: checkpoints are occurring too frequently (28
seconds apart)
2008-07-30 15:05:01 EDT HINT: Consider increasing the configuration
parameter "checkpoint_segments".
2008-07-30 15:13:34 EDT LOG: checkpoints are occurring too frequently (
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> Thomas H. wrote:
so at least that explains the "changed" behaviour. nevertheless,
LC_MESSAGES seems to be defunct - with the "locale" folder present,
pg always picks the os' language and ignore
Hi Magnus.
I have tried with Inoue-san, investigation of this problem, and adjustment.
http://winpg.jp/~saito/pg_work/LC_MESSAGE_CHECK/LC_TIME_PATCH/pg8.3.3-to_char_gettext_format.png
Native-strftime was proposed by Tom-san. It corrects(LC_TIME) from
8.3.3.(LC_MESSAGES)
http://winpg.jp/~saito/pg
In the regression database:
regression=# select distinct on (ten) ten, thousand from tenk1 order by ten,
thousand;
ten | thousand
-+--
0 |0
1 |1
2 |2
3 |3
4 |4
5 |5
6 |6
7 |7
8 |8
9
On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 13:07 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> We could probably fix this by complicating the logic in ExecUnique,
> but I wonder whether it wouldn't be better to just stop treating
> Unique nodes as backwards-scannable.
No problem there.
> The only reason for that
> node type to exist
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've never seen anyone scan backwards like this at all in practical use.
> I knew it was possible, but never seen it done.
> It seems entirely probable nobody else has either. It's a PostgreSQL
> extension, so people arriving from outside don't even know
On 8/5/08, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I've never seen anyone scan backwards like this at all in practical use.
>
> > I knew it was possible, but never seen it done.
>
> > It seems entirely probable nobody else has either. It's a PostgreSQL
> >
On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 18:00 -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> On 8/5/08, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > I've never seen anyone scan backwards like this at all in practical use.
> >
> > > I knew it was possible, but never seen it done.
> >
> > > I
