Hello and namaste
I am in a project that uses PostGresSql v9.0. We are developing an application
in CSharp to parse the PG server activity log installed on Windows 2003/XP or
higher.
Our application will :
Scan the Log for a given search text and Post rows found
Produce statistics related t
On Sep 9, 2012, at 16:36, Andre Lopes wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've developed a system that was not to work online, but now it is
> online and it is degrading due to bad design choices.
>
> Here is the thing. I've the database build in "vertical mode". I will
> justo explain what I mean with that.
>
>
Hi,
I've developed a system that was not to work online, but now it is
online and it is degrading due to bad design choices.
Here is the thing. I've the database build in "vertical mode". I will
justo explain what I mean with that.
Attribute | Value
site_name | Some site name1
uri
We (PostgreSQL Europe) are considering to hold a PGDay on February 1st
2012, the day before FOSDEM, in Brussels, Belgium. This will be one
day of PostgreSQL presentations, in addition to the devroom we plan to
run during FOSDEM, in order to expand the PostgreSQL presence. It will
be a single track
On 09/09/12 23:12, vdg wrote:
Thanks for your help.
Before posting, I had tried something like
check ((ALL(i) >= 0) AND (ALL(i) <= 1024 )));
but i got syntax errors.
It seems the first ALL() was not recognized.
Could someone give me documentation hints on this behaviour ?
vdg
On Saturday,
http://ledgersmbdev.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/or-modelling-interlude-postgresql-vs.html
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
http://ledgersmbdev.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/or-modelling-interlude-postgresql-
vs.html
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
vdg writes:
> Before posting, I had tried something like
> check ((ALL(i) >= 0) AND (ALL(i) <= 1024 )));
> but i got syntax errors.
Well, that's not the syntax.
> Could someone give me documentation hints on this behaviour ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/functions-subquery.html#F
Thomas Kellerer wrote:
> Bret Stern wrote on 08.09.2012 22:18:
>> A better place for validation is in the front-end, before
>> adding/attempting to add data to the db (my opinion).
>> Nice to see there are always other ways though.
>>
>
> I beg to differ: every validation that can be enforced by
Bret Stern wrote on 08.09.2012 22:18:
A better place for validation is in the front-end, before
adding/attempting to add data to the db (my opinion).
Nice to see there are always other ways though.
I beg to differ: every validation that can be enforced by declarative
constraints *should* be c
Thanks for your help.
Before posting, I had tried something like
check ((ALL(i) >= 0) AND (ALL(i) <= 1024 )));
but i got syntax errors.
It seems the first ALL() was not recognized.
Could someone give me documentation hints on this behaviour ?
vdg
On Saturday, 08 September 2012 13:18:25 Bret
Hi,
Dne 09.09.2012 11:25, Herouth Maoz napsal:
We have tables which we archive and shorten every day. That is - the
main table that has daily inserts and updates is kept small, and
there
is a parallel table with all the old data up to a year ago.
In the past we noticed that the bulk transfer
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 8:34 PM, wrote:
> Andreas writes:
>
>> How would I group the table so that it shows groups that have
>> similarity () > x ?
>>
>> Lets say the table looks like this:
>>
>> id, txt
>> 1, aa1
>> 2, bb1
>> 3, cc1
>> 4, bb2
>> 5, bb3
>> 6, aa2
>> ...
>>
>> How wo
We have tables which we archive and shorten every day. That is - the main table
that has daily inserts and updates is kept small, and there is a parallel table
with all the old data up to a year ago.
In the past we noticed that the bulk transfer from the main table to the
archive table takes a
14 matches
Mail list logo