On Sep 6, 2013, at 9:37 PM, François Beausoleil wrote:
>
> Le 2013-09-07 à 00:29, Steve Atkins a écrit :
>
>> If I have a partitioned table that has some range constraints that look
>> kinda like they're intended for constraint exclusion, but aren't quite
>> non-overlapping, will that break
Le 2013-09-07 à 00:29, Steve Atkins a écrit :
> If I have a partitioned table that has some range constraints that look kinda
> like they're intended for constraint exclusion, but aren't quite
> non-overlapping, will that break anything?
>
> e.g.
>
> create table jan ( …, check(created >= '2
If I have a partitioned table that has some range constraints that look kinda
like they're intended for constraint exclusion, but aren't quite
non-overlapping, will that break anything?
e.g.
create table jan ( …, check(created >= '2013-01-01' and created <
'2013-02-01'), check(id >=0 and id
On Friday, September 6, 2013, pg noob wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm curious about some of the query estimates that I'm seeing with queries
> that use DISTINCT.
> I am using postgres 8.4.13
>
> I did a couple of quick tests, and found that PostgreSQL seems to do some
> expensive work to
> return DISTI
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 8:22 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> I'm still partial to this guy:
>
> http://www.commandprompt.com/images/mammoth_versus_dolphin_500.jpg
I dislike that image, and always have. Apart from risking alienating
people, I think it sends the wrong message - that we define ourselves
pg noob wrote:
> The GROUP BY performs much better than DISTINCT even though both
> these two queries return the exact same count result.
No, GROUP BY performs much better than count(DISTINCT colname).
To confirm that this isn't something that has changed in the four
years since 8.4 was release
Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 8:22 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
I'm still partial to this guy:
http://www.commandprompt.com/images/mammoth_versus_dolphin_500.jpg
I dislike that image, and always have. ...
I agree with Mr. Geoghegan.
That image should be eradicated from the p
On 09/06/2013 11:05 AM, miles wrote:
Bobby Dewitt wrote
I come from an Oracle background and I am fairly new to Postgres.
Oracle's command line utility (SQL*Plus) uses an environment variable
called SQLPATH to search the given directories for SQL scripts that the
user calls to execute using a me
lup wrote
>>
>>
> I wonder if this would at least get the full path on-screen for a c/p
> \! for d in $SQLPATH; do find $d -name
>
> ; done
>
> That said, I would down-vote this suggestion. I tend to put sql files
> in amongst my various project dirs and maintaining the envvar isn't
> w
Hi all,
I'm curious about some of the query estimates that I'm seeing with queries
that use DISTINCT.
I am using postgres 8.4.13
I did a couple of quick tests, and found that PostgreSQL seems to do some
expensive work to
return DISTINCT rows. This is contrary to what I was expecting because I
ex
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 10:45:26AM -0700, David Johnston wrote:
- lup wrote
- >>
- >>
- > I wonder if this would at least get the full path on-screen for a c/p
- > \! for d in $SQLPATH; do find $d -name
- >
- > ; done
- >
- > That said, I would down-vote this suggestion. I tend to put sql
In my opinion, the use of such a feature is to make simple, commonly
used scripts available from wherever you start up psql and no matter
what database you are connecting to. On Oracle/SQL*Plus I have used
this feature to create simple scripts that replicate informational
backslash commands in psql
On 9/6/2013 2:00 PM, jane...@web.de wrote:
Where can I change levensthein_max_length?
as the message you quoted said, its
#define MAX_LEVENSHTEIN_STRLEN
I'd expect this (without bothering to look) to be in a .h file in the
fuzzystrmatch contributed module directory.
--
john r p
Where can I change levensthein_max_length?
Janek Sendrowski
Von: "Szymon Guz"
An: "Tom Lane"
Betreff: Re: [GENERAL] Levenshtein Distance with more than 255 characters
On 6 September 2013 08:47, Tom Lane wrote:
> Szymon Guz writes:
> > On 6 September 2013 01:00, Janek Sendrowski wrote:
> >> I
Do you know the destination. I cant find it.
We use logshipping replication, and have recently noticed a nasty bug
where, in certain very rare cases, the primary archive_command program
will fail to send the WAL file to the standby but report good return code 0 to
postgresql.
In such cases, if the standby then triggers its termination
Bobby Dewitt wrote
> I come from an Oracle background and I am fairly new to Postgres.
> Oracle's command line utility (SQL*Plus) uses an environment variable
> called SQLPATH to search the given directories for SQL scripts that the
> user calls to execute using a method similar to the \i meta-com
Thanks a lot
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 10:26 PM, Agustin Larreinegabe
> wrote:
> > I want to know if exists a postgres function or some easy way to know if
> a
> > PK in a table is already referenced in another table/tables.
> psql has all y
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 8:19 AM, Tim Kane wrote:
> Ahh. All these years (albeit sporadic), I never knew about FETCH_COUNT.
> That makes sense. Thanks muchly.
Not your fault: FETCH_COUNT is a hack IMO. The real issue was that
libpq (until recently) forced the entire result into memory before it
wa
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 10:26 PM, Agustin Larreinegabe
wrote:
> I want to know if exists a postgres function or some easy way to know if a
> PK in a table is already referenced in another table/tables.
psql has all you want for that. For example in this case:
=# create table aa (a int primary key);
Hi Augustin,
PostgreSQL has a couple of possibilities in this regard.
For example,
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1152260/postgres-sql-to-list-table-foreign-keyshas
a couple of very clear queries.
Additionally, it would be very useful if you could further clarify the
problem you are trying to
Hi everyone:
I want to know if exists a postgres function or some easy way to know if a
PK in a table is already referenced in another table/tables.
e.g.
I want to delete a row but first I've got to change or delete in the
table/tables where is referenced, and I have many table where could be
ref
Ahh. All these years (albeit sporadic), I never knew about FETCH_COUNT.
That makes sense. Thanks muchly.
On 06/09/2013 14:11, "Suzuki Hironobu" wrote:
>(13/09/06 21:06), Tim Kane wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have a fairly simple query, running on a particularly large table.
>>For
>> illustration
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Albe Laurenz wrote:
> ascot.m...@gmail.com wrote:
>> I am planing to backup archived WAL files from master to another machine, is
>> there a way to check and
>> make sure the backup archive file are all good and no any file missing or
>> corrupted?
>
> The only 10
(13/09/06 21:06), Tim Kane wrote:
Hi all,
I have a fairly simple query, running on a particularly large table. For
illustration:
echo "select * from really_big_table;" | psql my_database > /dev/null
When I monitor the memory usage of the psql session, it continually grows.
In fact, for this
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 5 Září 2013, 8:52, Arun P.L wrote:
>> Actual intention of the migration of old records was to
>> speed up the original_data_table which is used frequently by users. How
>> can I get this problem get this fixed? What are the steps to be follo
Tim Kane wrote:
> I have a fairly simple query, running on a particularly large table. For
> illustration:
>
> echo "select * from really_big_table;" | psql my_database > /dev/null
See psql's FETCH_COUNT. From the manpage:
FETCH_COUNT
If this variable is set t
Hi all,
I have a fairly simple query, running on a particularly large table. For
illustration:
echo "select * from really_big_table;" | psql my_database > /dev/null
When I monitor the memory usage of the psql session, it continually grows.
In fact, for this particularly large table it grows
>I want to backup a database but exclude certain schemas with a patter.
>I have 100 schemas with the pattern: 'sch_000', 'sch_001', and so on.
>Will this work?
>$pg_dump --exclude-schema='sch_*'
>this does not seem to exclude all schemas with this pattern ( 'sch_*' ),
>anything wrong here?
>t
Hello:
Sorry for disturbing again.
Some of my friends told me about cgroups, So I tried it first.
I found that cgroups can work for task such as wget.
But it can't work for my postgres process.
[root@cent6 Desktop]# cat /etc/cgconfig.conf
#
# Copyright IBM Corporation. 2007
#
# Authors: Balbi
On 6 September 2013 10:33, Richard Huxton wrote:
> On 06/09/13 09:13, Szymon Guz wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> why isn't 'aa' always treated as string?
>>
>
> with x as (
>>select
>>'1' a,
>>'2' b
>> )
>> SELECT levenshtein(a, b), length(a)
>> FROM x;
>>
>> ERROR: failed to find conversion fun
On 06/09/13 09:13, Szymon Guz wrote:
Hi,
why isn't 'aa' always treated as string?
with x as (
select
'1' a,
'2' b
)
SELECT levenshtein(a, b), length(a)
FROM x;
ERROR: failed to find conversion function from unknown to text
Why should I cast '1' to '1'::TEXT to satisfy a function
Hi,
why isn't 'aa' always treated as string?
While testing function for levenshtein distance I've noticed that:
with x as (
select
'1' a,
'2' b
)
SELECT levenshtein(a, b), length(a)
FROM x;
ERROR: failed to find conversion function from unknown to text
with x as (
select
'1'::TEXT a,
2013-09-06 02:57 keltezéssel, Wang, Jing írta:
Hi,
ECPG don't support the following scenario:
char cur_name = "cur1";
EXEC SQL DECLARE :cur_name CURSOR FOR ...
EXEC SQL OPEN :cur_name;
EXEC SQL FETCH cur1 INTO...
...
EXEC SQL CLOSE :cur_name;
An compile error will occur for above codes b
On 6 September 2013 08:47, Tom Lane wrote:
> Szymon Guz writes:
> > On 6 September 2013 01:00, Janek Sendrowski wrote:
> >> I'm searching for an optimized Levenshtein Distance like Postgresql's.
> My
> >> problem is that I want to compare strings with a length over 255
> characters.
> >> Does a
ascot.m...@gmail.com wrote:
> I am planing to backup archived WAL files from master to another machine, is
> there a way to check and
> make sure the backup archive file are all good and no any file missing or
> corrupted?
The only 100% safe way would be to restore them, e.g. with
a standby data
36 matches
Mail list logo
