Dear All, I am currently using PostgreSQL database version 8.0.13. My problem relates to a slow result when a query using a defined view joins to another table for a result. Background: I have 7 tables of invoice transactions. The tables are slightly different in that they record different dat
On Jan 25, 2008 2:41 PM, Scott Marlowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 25, 2008 1:34 PM, Geoffrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It seems that I recall there is a way to display the actual select
> > statement that is executed when you execute the \d command.
>
> psql --help says:
>
> -E
On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 14:57 -0500, Chris Browne wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ow Mun Heng) writes:
> > Just wondering if my 'Perceived' feeling that since implementing slony
> > for master/slave replication of select tables, my master database
> > performance is getting slower.
> >
> > I'm constantl
On Jan 25, 2008 12:02 AM, brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The client for a web application I'm working on wants certain URLs to
> contain the full names of members ("SEO-friendly" links). Scripts would
> search on, say, a member directory entry based on the name of the
> member, rather than the
On Sun, 27 Jan 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ok, at the moment i got some traffic and my load is at 1.5. But now with
logging the timestamp I have seen that the long durations are quite regular
at intervals of 10 minutes.
Sure sounds like checkpoints. You should turn on the checkpoint warnin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> ok, at the moment i got some traffic and my load is at 1.5. But now with
> logging the timestamp I have seen that the long durations are quite regular
> at intervals of 10 minutes.
Well, that's pretty suggestive. Tell us about your checkpoint and
bgwriter settings.
Am Sonntag 27 Januar 2008 18:56:49 schrieb Tom Lane:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > we run postgresql-8.1 on a dedicated debian box 64bit, dual-core CPU, 8GB
> > RAM, RAID-1.
>
> 8.1.what?
8.1.11-0etch1
> > LOG: duration: 12636.746 ms statement: EXECUTE [PREPARE:
> > select nextval ('member
Mike,
I can't do that with my comments - I get all six of the records in the
result with the example instead of just four like I want . . but someone
else had a solution without using the "group by" clause . .
Phil.
On Sun, 2008-01-27 at 13:56 -0500, Mike Ginsburg wrote:
> Hi Phil,
> Each of
johnf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sunday 27 January 2008 10:56:18 am Mike Ginsburg wrote:
>> Each of columns that you specify in your SELECT clause, must also
>> appear in the GROPU BY clause.
> Is the requirement of select fields matching group by fields a SQL92
> requirement or something t
On Sunday 27 January 2008 10:56:18 am Mike Ginsburg wrote:
> Hi Phil,
> Each of columns that you specify in your SELECT clause, must also
> appear in the GROPU BY clause.
>
> SELECT COUNT(*) AS cnt, name, comment, ...
> FROM tst
> GROUP BY name, comment, ...
> HAVING COUNT(*) = 1;
>
Is the requir
Hi Phil,
Each of columns that you specify in your SELECT clause, must also
appear in the GROPU BY clause.
SELECT COUNT(*) AS cnt, name, comment, ...
FROM tst
GROUP BY name, comment, ...
HAVING COUNT(*) = 1;
Phil Rhoades wrote:
People,
select count(*) as cnt, name from tst group by nam
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> we run postgresql-8.1 on a dedicated debian box 64bit, dual-core CPU, 8GB
> RAM,
> RAID-1.
8.1.what?
> LOG: duration: 12636.746 ms statement: EXECUTE [PREPARE: select
> nextval ('member_id_seq')]
That's just bizarre, especially if your system isn't showing any
People,
> select count(*) as cnt, name from tst group by name having count(*) = 1
This worked for my basic example but not for my actual problem - I get
"column comment must appear in the GROUP BY clause or be used in an
aggregate function" errors so I have a related question:
With table:
nam
Guys,
On Sun, 2008-01-27 at 17:38 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> On 27/01/2008, Phil Rhoades <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Tino,
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 2008-01-27 at 15:16 +0100, Tino Wildenhain wrote:
> > > Phil Rhoades wrote:
> > > > People,
> > > >
> > > > I want to select from a table ONLY uniqu
On 27/01/2008, Phil Rhoades <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tino,
>
>
> On Sun, 2008-01-27 at 15:16 +0100, Tino Wildenhain wrote:
> > Phil Rhoades wrote:
> > > People,
> > >
> > > I want to select from a table ONLY unique records ie if a column has
> > > values:
> > >
> > > 1
> > > 2
> > > 3
> > > 3
>
On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 03:32:18AM +1100, Phil Rhoades wrote:
> SELECT count(*) as cnt, name FRoM tst GROUP BY name HAVING cnt = 1 ;
> ERROR: column "cnt" does not exist
> LINE 1: ...ount(*) as cnt, name FRoM tst GROUP BY name HAVING cnt = 1 ;
having count(*) = 1;
depesz
--
quicksil1er: "postg
Tino,
On Sun, 2008-01-27 at 15:16 +0100, Tino Wildenhain wrote:
> Phil Rhoades wrote:
> > People,
> >
> > I want to select from a table ONLY unique records ie if a column has
> > values:
> >
> > 1
> > 2
> > 3
> > 3
> > 4
> > 5
> >
> > I want ONLY these records returned:
> >
> > 1
> > 2
> > 4
Pavel,
You didn't read my note properly - your query gives:
1
2
3
4
5
I want:
1
2
4
5
Phil.
On Sun, 2008-01-27 at 15:10 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Hello
>
> try
>
> SELECT DISTINCT col FROM table
>
> Pavel
>
> On 27/01/2008, Phil Rhoades <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > People,
> >
> >
Phil Rhoades wrote:
People,
I want to select from a table ONLY unique records ie if a column has
values:
1
2
3
3
4
5
I want ONLY these records returned:
1
2
4
5
SELECT count(*) as cnt,a,b,c FORM yourtable
GROUP BY a,b,c
HAVING cnt=1
should do.
Regards
Tino
---(en
Hello
try
SELECT DISTINCT col FROM table
Pavel
On 27/01/2008, Phil Rhoades <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> People,
>
> I want to select from a table ONLY unique records ie if a column has
> values:
>
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 3
> 4
> 5
>
> I want ONLY these records returned:
>
> 1
> 2
> 4
> 5
>
> Thanks,
>
>
People,
I want to select from a table ONLY unique records ie if a column has
values:
1
2
3
3
4
5
I want ONLY these records returned:
1
2
4
5
Thanks,
Phil.
--
Philip Rhoades
Pricom Pty Limited (ACN 003 252 275 ABN 91 003 252 275)
GPO Box 3411
Sydney NSW 2001
Australia
Fax: +61:(0)
> I think we finally found the problem. Please see if things are more
> stable with 8.3RC1 plus this patch:
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2008-01/msg00190.php
Sorry for being so late. I'm currently using PostgreSQL RC2 at work
and I notice no crashes.
Thanks!
--
Lawrence,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunatly i can not tell at which time this happens as the log doesn't
show the time of day.
Start with your postgresql.conf -
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/interactive/runtime-config-logging.html
points of interest :-
log_min_messages - debug1 to get som
Hi,
we run postgresql-8.1 on a dedicated debian box 64bit, dual-core CPU, 8GB RAM,
RAID-1.
We select our primary keys with select nextval before we actually insert a
record. In my logs i print every statement which takes longer than 250ms
there are lots of values fetched each day with nextval
24 matches
Mail list logo
