Hi Nix,
The problem is, that while doing the vacuum full ANALYZE the table was
empty. It therefore gathered statistics of a situation which isn't there
anymore when you fill up the table. In an empty or small table, it is
normal to do sequential scans. Which you most of the time don't want in
a
Hi Greg,
Although it doesn't really seem to be a very well-structured database
design, I think there is a solution.
If the amount of fields is low, you can just stick a CASE in the MAX like:
SELECT ...,
MAX(
CASE WHEN value1 > value2 THEN
(CASE WHEN value1 > value3 THEN value1 ELSE va
I don't know. I just deduced that from an earlier situation where I new
the size of the data, and noticed that the largest table was split up in
enough 1GB parts to fit that size ;)
Best regards,
Arjen
On 20-10-2004 10:14, Leonardo Francalanci wrote:
When a data file for a specific table (or ind
When a data file for a specific table (or index?) is larger than 1GB,
its split up in several parts. This is probably a left over from the
time OSs used to have problems with large files.
The file name, that number, is the OID of the table afaik. And the
postfix is of course the number in the o
On 7-6-2004 23:29, Dennis Gearon wrote:
please CC me, I am on digest
-
I have the following code from an application that is 'mysql_centric'. I
want to make it generic across all databases, if it's possible,
especially postgres :-)
mysql version:
INSERT INTO ca
Enver ALTIN wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, 2004-01-02 at 13:38, Chris Travers wrote:
A few years ago, I set about porting a PHP application from MySQL to
PostgreSQL, after realizing that MySQL wasn't going to be able to handle it.
In order to do this, I built a light, fast database abstraction layer which
c
with that host table) instead of the like that is used now?
By the way, can a construction like (tablefield || '') ever use an index
in postgresql?
Best regards and good luck,
Arjen van der Meijden
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tom built storage system (and you could offload it to
another machine, like we did).
Btw, if you really need an "in database" solution, read back the
postings of Eric Ridge at 26-12-2003 20:54 on the hackers list (he's
working on integrating xapian in postgresql as a FTI)
Best rega
Rod,
Have a look at the bottom of this page:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/sql-select.html
"Nonstandard Clauses
The clauses DISTINCT ON, LIMIT, and OFFSET are not defined in the SQL
standard."
TOP x isn't in the standard as well, afaik.
Best regards,
Arjen
Roderick A. Anderso
nodes...
So the claimed advantage of the better performance is a bit limited,
you'll either need *very* large integers to store large trees, or you
are simply limited in the size of your tree by some relatively small
numbers. And that is a bit sad, since bad performance is only a
problem/visibl
I haven't really tested it, but wanted to point it out to you.
Regards,
Arjen van der Meijden
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
> Graham Leggett
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am trying to do a query that returns all rows that are
> _not_ part of a join, and so far I cannot seem to find a
> query that doesn't take 30 minutes or more to run.
>
> The basic query is "select * from tableA where tableA_id NOT
> IN (select tableA_id fro
> Jan Wieck wrote:
> If you work on Unix systems remotely on a regular base, you
> should have
> a Unix system as a workstation too. That way you can use ssh(1) to
> forward your X11 connections through a secure channel.
>
> A "second" PC can be implemented as a memory+disk upgrade
> together
According to Sun, http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=221, it is not yet
available:
"2.11 Please describe the anticipated schedule for the development of
this specification.
This specification will be available towards the end of the calendar
year, 2004. "
So I wonder why you expect a Postgresql JDBC
14 matches
Mail list logo
