Thank you all very much for this information
On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 12:38 AM Alban Hertroys wrote:
>
>
> > On 21 Sep 2018, at 17:49, Durgamahesh Manne
> wrote:
> >
> >
>
> Considering how hard you try to get rid of duplicates, I'm quite convinced
> that you're at least short a few join condit
Last week I encountered the following at a customer site on PostgreSQL 9.6,
and I cannot explain it.
The first run gave me this:
Index Scan using device_outbound_messages_status on device_outbound_messages
(cost=0.43..20.46 rows=97 width=128) (actual time=34.021..35.545 rows=133
loops=1)
I
On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 2:20 PM, Laurenz Albe
wrote:
>
>
> But how can it be that the first run has to touch 74917 blocks,
> while whe second run only needs to touch 1185?
>
>
The first index scan may have killed lots of index tuples.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Pavan Deolasee http://w
Hi,
I'm new to PostgresSQL and to this list! I have installed version 10
64-bit (on Windows 7) I also used stackbuilder to install the ODBC
drivers. The SQL shell allows me to logon to the server as postgres but
when starting pgAdmin I get: The application server could not be
contacted. This
Hi thanks,
Sadly PHP and IIS isn't the issue. It’s when you bring Postgres into the fold
that I am getting a problem. But thanks.
Mark
__
-Original Message-
From: Adrian Klaver
Sent: 23 September 2018 15:36
To: Mark Williams ; pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org;
dan...@manitou-mail.
Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 2:20 PM, Laurenz Albe
> wrote:
> >
> > But how can it be that the first run has to touch 74917 blocks,
> > while whe second run only needs to touch 1185?
> >
>
> The first index scan may have killed lots of index tuples.
So the first index scan
On 9/24/18 2:24 AM, Richard Nielsen wrote:
Hi,
I'm new to PostgresSQL and to this list! I have installed version 10
64-bit (on Windows 7) I also used stackbuilder to install the ODBC
drivers. The SQL shell allows me to logon to the server as postgres but
when starting pgAdmin I get: The appli
Hi
On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 10:46 +0100, Mark Williams wrote:
> Hi thanks,
>
> Sadly PHP and IIS isn't the issue. It’s when you bring Postgres into
> the fold that I am getting a problem. But thanks.
>
> Mark
>
>
I'm not a Windows user and no little about setting up Postgres using
IIS, but you mi
Hello Thomas,
Thanks for the link. I read the documentation you linked, and part of it I
understood and rest went above my head. Probably I need to read it multiple
times to understand what is going on. I am learning how indexing works in DBMS.
Mostly I understood Btree so far. I am an applicat
Hi all,
I've got an interesting use case that I am stuck on. It's a bit of a
complicated environment, but I'll try to keep it simple.
In short; I have a history schema that has tables that match the
public schema, plus one 'history_id' column that has a simple sequential
bigserial value.
On 2018-09-25 1:22 a.m., digimer wrote:
Can I tell a produce to use a specific UUID?
s/produce/procedure/
Do you need a single field for the pk or can you just make it the
(original_table_pk, modified_time)? Alternatively, you could generate a
uuid v3 from the (original_table_pk, modified_time) using something like
uuid_generate_v3(uuid_nil(), original_table_pk || ":" || modified_time)?
On 2018-09-25 1:33 a.m., James Keener wrote:
Do you need a single field for the pk or can you just make it the
(original_table_pk, modified_time)? Alternatively, you could generate
a uuid v3 from the (original_table_pk, modified_time) using something
like uuid_generate_v3(uuid_nil(), original_t
v3 UUIDs are basically MD5 hashes (v5 is sha1?). So for the same input
you'll always get the same hash.
I had assumed the modified time would be the same; if that's not, then I'm
not sure and my gut tells me this becomes A Really Hard Problem™.
Jim
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 1:38 AM digimer wrote:
Also, modified time doesn't need to be the current time, if it starts as
"null" and is set on the first update, and all subsequent updates, the
pre-update modified time could be used to help key the history pk.
Jim
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 1:45 AM James Keener wrote:
> v3 UUIDs are basically MD5
Oh, this is a very interesting approach! I didn't realize any UUIDs
could be created in a predictable way. Thank you, this might be what I need.
digimer
On 2018-09-25 1:47 a.m., James Keener wrote:
Also, modified time doesn't need to be the current time, if it starts
as "null" and is set o
Arup Rakshit wrote:
> Thanks for the link. I read the documentation you linked, and part of it
> I understood and rest went above my head. Probably I need to read it multiple
> times to understand what is going on. I am learning how indexing works in
> DBMS.
> Mostly I understood Btree so far. I a
17 matches
Mail list logo
