On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Steven Schlansker wrote:
>
> On Jul 5, 2012, at 3:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > Steven Schlansker writes:
> >> Why is using an OR so awful here?
> >
> > Because the OR stops it from being a join (it possibly needs to return
> > some rows that are not in the semijoin
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 10:00 PM, Chip Nowacek wrote:
> I need a suggestion. I need a two-column primary key that does not depend
> on the order of the entries. That is, for the purposes of the key:
>
> PKColA PKColB
> foobar
> barfoo
>
> is not valid.
>
I don't think
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Chip Nowacek wrote:
> I need a suggestion. I need a two-column primary key that does not depend
> on the order of the entries. That is, for the purposes of the key:
>
> PKColA PKColB
> foobar
> barfoo
>
What about a unique functional in
I need a suggestion. I need a two-column primary key that does not depend
on the order of the entries. That is, for the purposes of the key:
PKColA PKColB
foobar
barfoo
is not valid.
Any help would be appreciated.
On 07/06/12 5:51 PM, ach wrote:
My fastest postgresql servers have everything on one raid10, using 16 or
>20 15000 rpm SAS2 drives on a 1gb flash-backed cache controller.
Thank you - that affirms what'd been my own growing supposition, and the
plan
>why?
Really? ...Well, I mean, I'd just bee
On 07/06/2012 02:34 PM, Perry Smith wrote:
Hi Guys,
This isn't a PostgreSQL specific question but just a SQL question. If this is
not an appropriate question for this list, please let me know.
It is also, perhaps, a really silly question.
This query (without the 'explain' keyword) , when exe
> My fastest postgresql servers have everything on one raid10, using 16 or
> 20 15000 rpm SAS2 drives on a 1gb flash-backed cache controller.
Thank you - that affirms what'd been my own growing supposition, and the
plan
> why?
Really? ...Well, I mean, I'd just been going with what I'd seen as
On 07/06/2012 03:34 PM, Perry Smith wrote:
Hi Guys,
This isn't a PostgreSQL specific question but just a SQL question. If this is
not an appropriate question for this list, please let me know.
It is also, perhaps, a really silly question.
This query (without the 'explain' keyword) , when exe
Hi Guys,
This isn't a PostgreSQL specific question but just a SQL question. If this is
not an appropriate question for this list, please let me know.
It is also, perhaps, a really silly question.
This query (without the 'explain' keyword) , when executed takes forever and a
day:
> condor_dev
On Jul 5, 2012, at 6:35 PM, Jasen Betts wrote:
> I note you've decided to rewrite this query as a union
>
>> SELECT * FROM account
>> WHERE user_id in
>>(SELECT user_id FROM account
>> WHERE id =
>> ANY('{-02f6-379d-c000-00026810,-0320-b467-c000-00026810,000
> -Original Message-
> From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-general-
> ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Andy Chambers
> Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 4:34 PM
> To: pgsql
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Weird "LIKE" behaviour
>
> On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 4:26 PM, David Johnston wr
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 4:26 PM, David Johnston wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-general-
>> ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Andy Chambers
>> Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 4:17 PM
>> To: pgsql
>> Subject: [GENERAL] Weird "LIKE" behaviou
> -Original Message-
> From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-general-
> ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Andy Chambers
> Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 4:17 PM
> To: pgsql
> Subject: [GENERAL] Weird "LIKE" behaviour
>
> Below are two queries that should be pretty much the s
Below are two queries that should be pretty much the same but with the
first one, I'm trying to boil it down to a minimal test-case so I
don't have to export the table definition of dcm.providers. The first
one returns nothing but at least executes the query.
=> create table foo ( foo text );
=>
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 2:07 PM, rverghese wrote:
> Yes I am using that option for one of my POstgres 9.1 database and it works
> well. But its still an issue with Foreign keys, which you need to drop and
> recreate .
Having to drop and create foriegn keys is a legitimate concern. I am
looking i
Hi all,
I believe this may be pertinent here. Last year I wrote a tutorial on
connecting LibreOffice to the powerful PostgreSQL database server. Now
there is an updated driver that allows read-write access. So I've updated
my tutorial, complete with screenshots this time. The actual connection
s
Hi,
(I've sent this mail about month ago, but received no reply. So I'm
trying again.)
I've noticed that the selection of the executed query plan (and
therefore query runtime) is dependent on the statistics generated by
an ANALYZE run. As an demonstration, I chose the best runtime of 5
consecutiv
Hi,
I've noticed that regular expressions which are anchored at the
beginning of the text but have an optional part at the beginning
(e.g. '^(ge)?kommen$') are not evaluated correctly if there is an
index on the column.
Consider the following table:
#+BEGIN_SRC sql
CREATE TABLE annotation (
On 07/06/12 10:05 AM, ach wrote:
A) Leave the disk setup as-is, with indexes on one drive and tables on
another?
OR
B) Combine the two separate drives into a single RAID 0, put both indexes
and table data on that RAID, and run from there?
My fastest postgresql servers have everything on
Yes I am using that option for one of my POstgres 9.1 database and it works
well. But its still an issue with Foreign keys, which you need to drop and
recreate . Also I use Slony for replication and it uses the primary key to
check repl. So I don't want that to be interrupted by dropping PK and
rec
Bloat in primary key indexes has been a long standing issue (although not
faced by many), and especially since online rebuild of primary keys was
never possible in production environments.
Since version 9.1 we have a nice little feature of being able to change a
primary key's underlying index. Loo
First and foremost, I just want to say Thank You, very much, sincerely, to
the entire PostgreSQL community for everything you are, do and have built.
Without going into an exorbitant amount of detail, suffice it to say that in
the context of my current work, you have truly been a Godsend.
I have
On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 09:07:53AM -0700, rverghese wrote:
> We are experiencing a similar problem, even though we are on 8.4 and have
> been for a while, and have autovacuum turned on. I have regular concurrent
> reindexes on the indexes but the primary key is seriously bloated. I was
> considerin
2012/7/6 Pavel Stehule :
> 2012/7/6 ChoonSoo Park :
>> It works!
>>
>> One more question.
>> Do I have to use CAST for parameter value holder?
>
you can cast array to int array
string_to_array(..., ',')::int[]
Regards
Pavel
> probably
>
> all values in array should to share one type, and when
2012/7/6 ChoonSoo Park :
> It works!
>
> One more question.
> Do I have to use CAST for parameter value holder?
probably
all values in array should to share one type, and when this type is
not same like holder, then you need cast
Regards
Pavel
>
> employee table's dept_id and salary columns ar
It works!
One more question.
Do I have to use CAST for parameter value holder?
employee table's dept_id and salary columns are integer types.
RETURN QUERY EXECUTE 'SELECT * FROM employee WHERE dept_id = $1[1] and
salary <= $1[2]' using tmpArrayValues;
When I use text array, it complains:
ERROR:
We are experiencing a similar problem, even though we are on 8.4 and have
been for a while, and have autovacuum turned on. I have regular concurrent
reindexes on the indexes but the primary key is seriously bloated. I was
considering doing the same thing, that is, create another primary key that
is
Hello
2012/7/6 ChoonSoo Park :
> Inside a function, I can execute dynamic query like this
>
> dept_id = 1;
> salary = 5;
> RETURN QUERY EXECUTE 'SELECT * FROM employee WHERE dept_id = $1 and
> salary >= $2' using dept_id, salary;
>
> When the query condition is dynamically ge
Inside a function, I can execute dynamic query like this
dept_id = 1;
salary = 5;
RETURN QUERY EXECUTE 'SELECT * FROM employee WHERE dept_id = $1 and
salary >= $2' using dept_id, salary;
When the query condition is dynamically generated and number of parameters
is also dynam
> I have an existing PostgreSQL DB and I would like to draw a model of the DB
> structure. Is there some software (Freeware) around that can read the
> existing structure of my DB and automatically draw e.g. an ER-model of that?
> The software that I have found so far (e.g. Open System Architect) s
30 matches
Mail list logo
