ng
---
More information on all this, as I noted, is in the archives of this
list and the ODBC list (in fact, most of the it is probably in the ODBC
list, since I was posting there quite a lot when I did the conversion).
I know that the above is probably vastly different from using the ADO
contr
be run).
> I'm guessing #1 is where you're having trouble. Just do
> "cd " prior to "./configure"
>
> If you're using these instructions:
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.4/interactive/installation.html
> Then that's probably what
ain), if
> you get stuck.
Tons of reference material and people out there - if there is one thing
good to say about Linux, it is that reference material on just about
every subject and problem exists out there, all one has to do is look
for it (now, sometimes that material is difficult to
he everybody was a "beginner" at one
time or another. But this question should be completely and fully
answered in some form on the internet - because it is a *basic*
component of every e-commerce site. Are people really reinventing the
wheel this much?
Andrew Ayers
Phoenix, Arizona
-
All,
I am having a problem with an INSERT onto a table I have created. First
off, here is the table:
---
CREATE TABLE reg ("customer number" SERIAL PRIMARY KEY, "company name"
VARCHAR(50) NULL, address VARCHAR(100) NULL, city VARCHAR(50) NULL,
state VARCHAR(2) NULL, zip VARCHAR(50) NULL, phon
the last line with the number of corresponding rows.
You seem to want to see the number of corresponding rows, not the stuff
"swish" by - or at least, I would hope you are more interested in the
count and not just text flying by...
In that case, do a "select count(*) from" SQ
rs provide a 1-900 number "service" to learn how to properly use them).
---
I think even my analogy has flaws, but it is much closer to the truth
about the GPL...
Andrew Ayers
Phoenix, Arizona
-- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE --
This message is intended for the sole use of the individual and e
Greg Stark wrote:
> Instead I have to have =='f' and =='t' strewn throughout my code everywhere
> making it harder to read and extremely fragile. If I forget one anywhere I
> silently get subtly broken semantics.
Why did you do that? Why not create a single function (isTrue()?) that
you pass the
Curtis Hawthorne wrote:
> According the the page there's no performance difference between the types so
> I would lean towards using unlimited varchar or text to avoid having an
> arbitrary limit, but are there any other hidden problems with using these
> types? If not, which one should I use?
I
Doug McNaught wrote:
> It's not the VACUUM that's necessary; it's the ANALYZE. The query
> planner uses table statistics to make its decisions, and ANALYZE is
> what collects those statistics. Without an ANALYZE the planner will
> make default assumptions that are rarely correct. :)
I am not th
10 matches
Mail list logo
