Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Tony Caduto wrote:
I did not have autovacuum turned on and I usually do a vacuumdb -z -a -f
-q each night but this one slipped through the cracks :-(
Strange -- autovacuum should have started an automatic database-
Matthew Peter wrote:
Wouldn't it work just like plpgsql functions? Where the first call caches the
plan
or whatever?
A stored procedure can cache the query plan but that is separate from
caching data.
When sending sql select statements to the server the query plan isn't
cached (if it was
--- Shane Ambler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matthew Peter wrote:
> > --- Willy-Bas Loos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> maybe you would find "materialized views" interesting.
> >> http://www.google.com/search?q=materialized+view+postgresql
> >>
> >>
> >> On 12/1/06, Matthew Peter <[EMAIL P
> > The problem I am having is on install of 8.1.5 it fails at the initdb call.
> > In checking the log, it seems to fail when
> > it creates the first data directory. It gets past the setting file
> > permissions, but when it tries to create data/global
> > it spits out an error message sayin
On 2-Dec-06, at 6:27 AM, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 08:26:53PM -0700, Brian Wipf wrote:
Now I know the cause at least. If anyone has an idea on how to kill a
similar hung connection without rebooting the server, I would
appreciate any suggestions.
I'm unsure about wh
I haven't seen any replies to this, so I will,
although I am not a j2ee/jdbc person.
On fim, 2006-11-30 at 14:14 -0700, Nathan Wilhelmi wrote:
> Server: 8.0.3 on Solaris 9
> JDBC Driver: 8.0.311
...
> delete from X where id in (select bad_id from Z where name='qwerty');
> delete from Y where id i
Someone posted a solution to this in the last couple of days on this
list. Have a good look...
Cheers
Antoine
On 30/11/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I apologize for being yet another noob posting about this problem. I have
spent 2 days searching the archives and the
net
Matthew Peter wrote:
--- Willy-Bas Loos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
maybe you would find "materialized views" interesting.
http://www.google.com/search?q=materialized+view+postgresql
On 12/1/06, Matthew Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is it possible to put an query result into memory? Like S
On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 08:26:53PM -0700, Brian Wipf wrote:
> Now I know the cause at least. If anyone has an idea on how to kill a
> similar hung connection without rebooting the server, I would
> appreciate any suggestions.
I'm unsure about why it wouldn't respond to a sigint, but did you tr
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I gave restricted permissions to the postgres user on the C: drive. After
doing this, I could run initdb without issue.
Something doesn't sit right with me with giving access to C: drive, but it
works. If anyone has any insights on what
this problem is/was and h
On 12/2/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The index was created before the table was populated. There are 3 rows in
the table for 3 different users. Now when I do a
postgresql will not use index scan for table with 3 rows in it. it is way
faster to use seq scan on it.
depesz
am Sat, dem 02.12.2006, um 16:35:47 +0530 mailte [EMAIL PROTECTED] folgendes:
>
> The index was created before the table was populated. There are 3 rows
> in the table for 3 different users. Now when I do a
In this case, with only 3 rows, it is much cheaper to do a seq-scan
instead a index-scan
Vivek --
If you could let people know what version of postgres, and which OS, it might
help.
A guess: the planner sees that there are very few rows and decides that a
sequential scan is faster (this is because a sequential scan on a table with
only a few rows is probably done in one operation;
Dear Friends,
I have a table as
\d userpref;
Table "public.userpref"
Column| Type | Modifiers
-++
username| character varying(101) | n
On 11/30/06, hubert depesz lubaczewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11/30/06, Teodor Sigaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Fixed, thank you. Changes are commited in CVS, pls, try it (I think that
> index
> is corrupted, so you need to recreate it)
great. thanks. i will retry. full retry will t
--- Willy-Bas Loos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> maybe you would find "materialized views" interesting.
> http://www.google.com/search?q=materialized+view+postgresql
>
>
> On 12/1/06, Matthew Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Is it possible to put an query result into memory? Like SELECT
16 matches
Mail list logo
