On Dec 10, 2014, at 19:38 , Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Are you saying when you use a GIN index on a,b,c fields, you can do
> lookups on them independently, like 'c'? I was not aware that works,
> but it might. I know it doesn't work for traditional btree as the index
> is hierarchical. You can l
Jonathan Vanasco writes:
> Thank you so much for posting this test.
> I got a seq scan on my local machine, so I checked the version... still
> running 9.2.4.
> I tried it on production (which is 9.3.x) and got the same result as you.
Hmm, well, I get the same result from 9.2.9, as well as ever
On Dec 12, 2014, at 4:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> regression=# create table tt (f1 int, f2 text);
> CREATE TABLE
> regression=# create index on tt (lower(f2));
> CREATE INDEX
> regression=# explain select * from tt order by lower(f2);
> QUERY PLAN
Jonathan Vanasco writes:
> Am I correct in observing that the value of a function index can't be used
> for sorting ?
No ...
regression=# create table tt (f1 int, f2 text);
CREATE TABLE
regression=# create index on tt (lower(f2));
CREATE INDEX
regression=# explain select * from tt order by lowe
On Dec 8, 2014, at 9:35 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> select a,b,c into newtable from oldtable group by a,b,c;
>
> On pass, done.
This is a bit naive, but couldn't this approach potentially be faster
(depending on the system)?
SELECT a, b, c INTO duplicate_records FROM ( SELECT a, b, c,
Can someone confirm a suspicion for me ?
I have a moderately sized table (20+ columns, 3MM rows) that tracks "tags".
I have a lower(column) function index that is used simplify case-insensitive
lookups.
CREATE INDEX idx_tag_name_lower ON tag(lower(name));
I have a few complex queries
Thank Marc (and all others)
I knew that nothing was for free and understanding where the costs come from
would provide me with some rationale to make my choice!
However, I understand from your answer that there is no definitive approach
to do it right at this time (considering my specific con
Awesome - thanks Tom, works.
alan
> On Dec 12, 2014, at 1:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Alan Nilsson writes:
>> I am trying to link libuuid into a custom extension, here is my make file
>> (building PG 9.3.5 on CentOS 6.5 (GCC 4.4.7) fwiw):
>
>> MODULES = aitpowerpg
>> EXTENSION = aitpowerpg
>>
Alan Nilsson writes:
> I am trying to link libuuid into a custom extension, here is my make file
> (building PG 9.3.5 on CentOS 6.5 (GCC 4.4.7) fwiw):
> MODULES = aitpowerpg
> EXTENSION = aitpowerpg
> DATA = aitpowerpg--1.0.sql
> SHLIB_LINK += -luuid
> ifdef USE_PGXS
> PG_CONFIG = pg_config
>
I recently had need to do the same thing and I am having no luck. Admittedly,
I am not too keen on the postgres build setup and have not debugged this
extensively, but rather hoped there was an easy answer up front. That said….
I am trying to link libuuid into a custom extension, here is my ma
>>Seems promising but could you provide me a reference to PostgreSQL
>>documentation regarding this "a%8=*" feature?
>>Best
>
> % is the modulus operator.
>
>Assuming "a" is an integer (I don't remember), then doing 8 selects of "a
>modulus 8" = for each of the possible results (0..7
John McKown wrote
> I don't
> know, myself, why this would be faster. But I'm not any kind of a
> PostgreSQL expert either.
It is faster because PostgreSQL does not have native parallelism. By using
a%n in a where clause you can start n separate sessions and choose a
different value of n for each
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 09:18:01AM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 6:18 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> pgsql-hackers are discussing some housekeeping in contrib.
>
> Is anyone using the oid2name tool?
>
> Otherwise, we might deprecate and eventually remove it.
>
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 6:18 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> pgsql-hackers are discussing some housekeeping in contrib.
>
> Is anyone using the oid2name tool?
>
> Otherwise, we might deprecate and eventually remove it.
>
I use it occasionally (but really dislike it) during testing and debugging,
t
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Daniel Begin wrote:
> Seems promising but could you provide me a reference to PostgreSQL
> documentation regarding this "a%8=*" feature?
> Best
>
% is the modulus operator.
Assuming "a" is an integer (I don't remember), then doing 8 selects of "a
modulus 8" = f
Seems promising but could you provide me a reference to PostgreSQL
documentation regarding this "a%8=*" feature?
Best
Daniel
-Original Message-
From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Marc Mamin
Sent: December-12-14 06:41
To: Danie
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 09:42:48AM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 12/12/14 9:25 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 09:18:53AM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >> pgsql-hackers are discussing some housekeeping in contrib.
> >>
> >> Is anyone using the oid2name tool?
> >>
> >>
On 12/12/14 9:25 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 09:18:53AM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> pgsql-hackers are discussing some housekeeping in contrib.
>>
>> Is anyone using the oid2name tool?
>>
>> Otherwise, we might deprecate and eventually remove it.
>
> Uh, if we remove it
Hi Adrian,
so finally I have a workaround which is ok for me. When I seperate the
tables and the data (using the -a and -s switch from pg_dump) into 2 sql
backup files, everything works ok on the problem-VM.
I try to investigate further in the coming weeks, I´m on holiday next week.
Regards and
On Friday, December 12, 2014, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 09:18:53AM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > pgsql-hackers are discussing some housekeeping in contrib.
> >
> > Is anyone using the oid2name tool?
> >
> > Otherwise, we might deprecate and eventually remove it.
>
> Uh,
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 09:18:53AM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> pgsql-hackers are discussing some housekeeping in contrib.
>
> Is anyone using the oid2name tool?
>
> Otherwise, we might deprecate and eventually remove it.
Uh, if we remove it, what tool does someone use from the command-line
pgsql-hackers are discussing some housekeeping in contrib.
Is anyone using the oid2name tool?
Otherwise, we might deprecate and eventually remove it.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/p
>Thank Tom,
>I understand that the rationale behind choosing to create a new table from
>distinct records is that, since both approaches need full table scans,
>selecting distinct records is faster (and seems more straight forward) than
>finding/deleting duplicates;
Hi,
on a large table you may g
23 matches
Mail list logo
