Re: [GENERAL] More Red Hat information

2001-06-26 Thread Matthias Urlichs
Hi, David Wheeler: > M$ is a good example, as their database is quite capable, and costs only a > few hundred bucks (last time I looked). If RedHat DB is three times the > price, IME many PHBs will go with SQL Server, instead, just because it's > cheaper, and they know the Microsoft name (and FUD

Re: [GENERAL] More Red Hat information

2001-06-26 Thread Steve Wolfe
> > In my experience DB pricing structures seem to be a mystery whichever > > platform you look at :) > > 20k per CPU. See: Word is that the 2006 Microsoft automobiles will have similar pricing structures. You'll pay $8,000 per year for each "seat-license" that you want, and another $2,000

[GENERAL] Returning records from function

2001-06-26 Thread ryan . a . roemmich
I'm moving to PostgreSQL from MS SQL Server. In MSSQL I usually create stored procedures to return result sets based on the passed arguments. I guess my question is: Is it possible to return multi-row data from the PL/PGSQL functions of Postgres? It's rather easy to just return one field f

Re: [GENERAL] Why is NULL not indexable?

2001-06-26 Thread Daniel Åkerud
I was thinking about what this actually meant and came to the conclusion that having SELECT * FROM foo WHERE bar IS NULL would always result in a sequential scan. Or does it mean anything else? Daniel Åkerud > > I can't work out what the 'strategy' bit refers to. All I can find in the > > sourc

[GENERAL] Adding a NOT NULL column?

2001-06-26 Thread Philip Molter
So I can add a column like: ALTER TABLE t ADD c SMALLINT and I can then set it's default value like: ALTER TABLE t ALTER c SET DEFAULT 0 but how do set that new column to be NOT NULL? The postgres docs say do something like: ALTER TABLE t ADD (table constraint definition) so I would d

Re: [GENERAL] More Red Hat information

2001-06-26 Thread Tony Grant
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I agree. How is a person supposed to count the number of users if the database > is being used to support a public dynamic web site? Is the company supposed to > buy a separate license for every unique IP address that ever hits a dynamic web > page on the site? I c

Re: [GENERAL] [HELP] Attribute has an unknown type/is repeated

2001-06-26 Thread Thalis A. Kalfigopoulos
On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Itzinger, Oskar wrote: > In PostgreSQL 7.1.2, I'm experimenting with the following two cases (all > referred to non-temporary tables exist in the current database): > > = > > 1. > > CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE tmp ( > col1 TEXT, > col2 TEXT, > col3 TEXT, > col4

Re: [GENERAL] More Red Hat information

2001-06-26 Thread wsheldah
I agree. How is a person supposed to count the number of users if the database is being used to support a public dynamic web site? Is the company supposed to buy a separate license for every unique IP address that ever hits a dynamic web page on the site? I can see licensing per server, or ev

[GENERAL] Large objects in web applications

2001-06-26 Thread wsheldah
Hi, Has there been any substantial change in the way large objects are handled with the coming of 7.1 and the expanded row size limit? Some old online articles suggested that would change things, but the current docs seem say I still need to use functions like lo_import. Assuming things haven

Re: [GENERAL] Why is NULL not indexable?

2001-06-26 Thread Tom Lane
Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I can't work out what the 'strategy' bit refers to. All I can find in the > source code is references to tables of magic numbers. I guess what I really > want to know is, how hard would it be to fix? I believe the main problem is that IS NULL a

Re: [GENERAL] [HELP] Attribute has an unknown type/is repeated

2001-06-26 Thread Tom Lane
"Itzinger, Oskar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 1. What exactly is the type of colx in Case 1? > 2. Why can't PostgreSQL infer that very same type for colx in Case 2? The || operator is known to yield a result of type "text". But when the sum total of the known information is '' AS colx

Re: [GENERAL] More Red Hat information

2001-06-26 Thread Matthias Urlichs
At 8:57 -0700 2001-06-25, David Wheeler wrote: >On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote: > >> Here is a link with more information than the press release: >> >> http://www.redhat.com/products/software/database/ > >$2225 Are they *kidding*??? If they really deliver, i.e. you get reason

Re: [GENERAL] Re: Harddisk performance degrading over time?

2001-06-26 Thread Daniel Åkerud
OK, so now I know it wasn't that. The strange thing is just that, that looking at all the test values collected, it seems like only indexed inserts and indexed selects has gotten slower for BOTH PostgreSQL and MySQL, Never mind... as long as it is maximally slow now ;) *kidding* Daniel Åkerud

Re: [GENERAL] Red Hat to support PostgreSQL

2001-06-26 Thread Paul Tomblin
Quoting Paul Tomblin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > In 1996-97, I had just been through the horror of upgrading a lab full of Sorry, that was 1991-92. What was I thinking? > machines from SLS 1.03 to Slackware, and then from one Slackware version -- Paul Tomblin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not speaking for

Re: [GENERAL] Red Hat to support PostgreSQL

2001-06-26 Thread Paul Tomblin
Quoting Tony Grant ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > In 1997 I bought a 6 CD set from Info Magic. RedHat was on disk one. I > installed it because it was on disk one... I had a machine running Suse In 1996-97, I had just been through the horror of upgrading a lab full of machines from SLS 1.03 to Slackwar