On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 09:08:00PM -0500, Ron Peterson wrote:
> I would like to be able to assert that the security of data stored
> as a value in a PostgreSQL table can be as high as the security of
> saving that same piece of data to a file on disk. Would that be
> correct?
I hate to put it so
On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 09:08:00PM -0500, Ron Peterson wrote:
> I would like to be able to assert that the security of data stored as a
> value in a PostgreSQL table can be as high as the security of saving
> that same piece of data to a file on disk. Would that be correct?
Theoretically, definit
On Feb 5, 2005, at 11:20 PM, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
Is this example telling me I get NULL for unitialized references?
I don't believe I should count on this behavior unless it's
documented, should I?
=> create or replace function foo() returns int language plpgsql
as 'declare a int; b int; begin a :=
On 02/05/2005 08:08:00 PM, Ron Peterson wrote:
I would like to be able to assert that the security of data stored as
a
value in a PostgreSQL table can be as high as the security of saving
that same piece of data to a file on disk. Would that be correct?
Well, from a theoretical perspective you're
Hi,
I've a plpgsql procedure I'm pretty sure is referencing
variables, array elements really, that have not been
initialized. Is this a well defined operation?
If so, what is the result? (NULL?) If not, shouldn't I be
getting some sort of error or warning?
I've
SET client_min_messages='debug';
and
I would like to be able to assert that the security of data stored as a
value in a PostgreSQL table can be as high as the security of saving
that same piece of data to a file on disk. Would that be correct?
I can set table permissions, and even use rules to enforce row level
access rights. Of co
Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jan Wieck):
> On 2/4/2005 5:56 AM, Mike Nolan wrote:
>
>>> If you have so much update load that one server cannot accomodate that
>>> load, then you should wonder why you'd expect that causing every one
>>> of these updates to be applied to (say) 3 servers would "diminish"
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
This can be easily done with pl/pgsql, visit the documentation at
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.3/interactive/programmer-pl.html
OT: seems like this is a questionnaire/survey application, yes?
- -
Jonel Rienton
http://blogs.road14.com
So
Bjørn T Johansen wrote:
I have just upgraded to 8.0.1 from 7.4.6 and now my triggers doesn't
work. When I insert a row in a table that has an insert trigger, I get
the following error msg:
ERROR: INSERT is not allowed in a non-volatile function
What does this mean?
Regards,
BTJ
It would appear
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bj=F8rn_T_Johansen?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have just upgraded to 8.0.1 from 7.4.6 and now my triggers doesn't work.
> When I insert a
> row in a table that has an insert trigger, I get the following error msg:
> ERROR: INSERT is not allowed in a non-volatile function
>
Bjørn T Johansen wrote:
I have just upgraded to 8.0.1 from 7.4.6 and now my triggers doesn't
work. When I insert a row in a table that has an insert trigger, I get
the following error msg:
ERROR: INSERT is not allowed in a non-volatile function
What does this mean?
Regards,
BTJ
It would appear
Bjørn T Johansen wrote:
I have just upgraded to 8.0.1 from 7.4.6 and now my triggers doesn't
work. When I insert a row in a table that has an insert trigger, I get
the following error msg:
ERROR: INSERT is not allowed in a non-volatile function
What does this mean?
That is highly documented in
Hello,
I am running postgres-7.3. I have a query like this:
SELECT question_id, question_text
FROM quiz_table
WHERE question_id IN (2,10,3,6,4,5);
But I want the output to be sorted in the way I give the question_id,
something like:
SELECT question_id, question_text
FROM quiz_table
WHERE quest
I have just upgraded to 8.0.1 from 7.4.6 and now my triggers doesn't work. When I insert a
row in a table that has an insert trigger, I get the following error msg:
ERROR: INSERT is not allowed in a non-volatile function
What does this mean?
Regards,
BTJ
--
--
On 2/4/2005 5:56 AM, Mike Nolan wrote:
If you have so much update load that one server cannot accomodate that
load, then you should wonder why you'd expect that causing every one
of these updates to be applied to (say) 3 servers would "diminish"
this burden.
The update/query load isn't the real iss
Venkatesh Babu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There aren't any triggers but there are 75262 update
> statements. The problem is that we have a datatype
> called as "Collection" and we are fetching the data
> rows into it, modifying the data and call
> Collection.save(). This save method generates on
Hello,
Command Prompt develops a lot of web based applications.
One of the problems with the web is you can't really
pre determine a lot of tasks because of the statelessness.
It would be nice if you could tell pgpool to perform certain
queries on initialization of a new connection. This would
allo
Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Si Chen) wrote:
> Hello everyone. I am trying to do an ALTER TABLE, but it hangs
> indefinitely. I think the table is locked from a transaction, and in
> pg_locks I found:
> relation 75907
> database 74861
> pid 29604
> mode AccessExc
After takin a swig o' Arrakan spice grog, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Julian Scarfe")
belched out:
> So all I'm looking for is a way for pgpool to shout if it detects a
> failure. That could initiate the investigation of the other
> criteria required for failover.
_There_ lies the one change that is nee
After a long battle with technology, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Patrick Hatcher), an
earthling, wrote:
> PG=7.4.5
>
> I guess I never noticed this during vacuum verbose before, but is it common
> for the index to be 2 to 3 times the number of rows in a table? I've tried
> reindexing and then dropping and
Venkatesh Babu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> There aren't any triggers but there are 75262 update
> statements. The problem is that we have a datatype
> called as "Collection" and we are fetching the data
> rows into it, modifying the data and call
> Collection.save(). This save method ge
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
On Sat, 5 Feb 2005, NTPT wrote:
Is there a way to determine how many connections to the database are active
?
some form of select ? ie how many client application are connected to server
? I need this value for client application ...
Check pg_
Is there a way to determine how many connections to the database are active
?
some form of select ? ie how many client application are connected to
server ? I need this value for client application ...
Thank for help.
---(end of broadcast)---
Hi,
There aren't any foreign keys and we are currently
using Postgres version 7.4...
--- Venkatesh Babu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There aren't any triggers but there are 75262 update
> statements. The problem is that we have a datatype
> called as "Collection" and we are fetching the
Hi,
There aren't any triggers but there are 75262 update
statements. The problem is that we have a datatype
called as "Collection" and we are fetching the data
rows into it, modifying the data and call
Collection.save(). This save method generates one
update satement per record present in it.
Tha
25 matches
Mail list logo
