Jonathon Suggs wrote, On 10-12-08 20:12:
I'm asking this as a more general question on which will perform
better. I'm trying to get a set of comments and their score/rankings
from two tables.
*comments*
cid (integer, primary key)
title
body
*comment_ratings*
cid (integer, primary key)
uid (i
Gregory Stark wrote, On 01-11-08 14:02:
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
But sorry I still can't get WHY compression as a whole and data
integrity are mutually exclusive.
...
[snip performance theory]
Postgres *guarantees* that as long as everything else works correctly it
Kevin Galligan wrote, On 29-10-08 23:35:
An example of a slow query is...
select count(*) from bigdatatable where age between 22 and 40 and state
= 'NY';
explain analyze returned the following...
Aggregate (cost=5179639.55..5179639.56 rows=1 width=0) (actual
time=389529.895..389529.897 ro
Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote, On 30-10-08 12:13:
it should, every book on encryption says, that if you compress your data
before encryption - its better.
Those books also should mention that you should leave this subject to
experts and have numerous examples on systems that follow the book, but
Matthew Pulis wrote:
Hi,
I need to perform some timed testing, thus need to make sure that disk
cache does not affect me. Is clearing the OS (Ubuntu) disk cache, ( by
running: sudo echo 3 | sudo tee /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches ) enough to
do this? If not can you please point me to some site ple
Markus Wanner wrote:
Hi,
I'm running several productive servers on Debian etch (stable) with
Postgres 8.2 which has been in lenny (testing) and made available for
etch through the backports project [1]. Unfortunately, they
discontinued maintaining 8.2 and switched to 8.3 in testing and thus
Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 1:10 PM, Martin Gainty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
accessing:
i *thought* the advantage of creating any SQL procedure/function was the
entity is stored in procedure cache
load time:
Java vs C++ compare here
http://www.idiom.com/~zilla/Computer/java
to get
it working optimally? I.e. would my method work or are there any better
solutions possible?
How can I write the filtering functions in such a manner that I can
later transform the solution in a trigger based one?
Regards,
- Joris Dobbelsteen
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgs
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo wrote, On 25-Aug-2008 18:48:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:07:23 -0400
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If you're feeling corageous, you can remove the pg_depend
entries for that sequ
Richard Huxton wrote, On 15-Jul-2008 15:19:
Sergey Konoplev wrote:
Yes it is. But it the way to break integrity cos rows from table2
still refer to deleted rows from table1. So it conflicts with
ideology isn't it?
Yes, but I'm not sure you could have a sensible behaviour-modifying
BEFORE tri
Peter wrote:
I have two immutable Pl/PG funcs - func A takes a parameter X, looks up
related value Y from a table and passes Y to func B. Now, if I do something
like
select A(field_x) from bigtable
it will, of course call A for every single row since paramater is changing.
However, it also call
Henrik wrote:
Hi list,
I'm having a table with a lots of file names in it. (Aprox 3 million) in
a 8.3.1 db.
Doing this simple query shows that the statistics is way of but I can
get them right even when I raise the statistics to 1000.
db=# alter table tbl_file alter file_name set statistic
Gurjeet Singh wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:29 AM, David Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Joris Dobbelsteen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
wrote:
>
> Ah, yes,
David Wilson wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 9:52 AM, Joris Dobbelsteen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Describe the mechanism, because I don't really believe it yet. I think you
need to do a advisory lock around every commit of every transaction that
writes to the log table.
Consider
David Wilson wrote:
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Joris Dobbelsteen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If you want to clean up the the staging table I have some concerns about
the advisory lock. I think you mean exclusive table lock.
Either works, really. An advisory lock is really just
David Wilson wrote:
(I originally missed replying to all here; sorry about the duplicate,
Vance, but figured others might be interested.
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Vance Maverick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Another approach would be to queue the log entries in a "staging" table,
so that
Craig Ringer wrote:
[snip]
If you really want to make somebody cry, I guess you could do it with
dblink - connect back to your own database from dblink and use a short
transaction to commit a log record, using table-based (rather than
sequence) ID generation to ensure that records were inserted
Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:44:51PM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
It won't work with multiple concurrent writers. There is no guarantee
that an INSERT with a timestamp older than the one you just saw isn't
waiting to commit.
This is pretty unlikely -- I won't say impossible,
>-Original Message-
>From: Ross Boylan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, 31 March 2008 0:23
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: RE: [GENERAL] database 1.2G, pg_dump 73M?!
>
>
>On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 22:
>-Original Message-
>From: Ross Boylan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Sunday, 30 March 2008 23:43
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] database 1.2G, pg_dump 73M?!
>
>On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 21:22
Ross Boylan wrote:
On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 20:27 +0200, Joris Dobbelsteen wrote:
Ross Boylan wrote:
I have a postgres server for which du reports
1188072 /var/lib/postgresql/8.2/main
on Linux system.
The server has only one real database, which is for bacula. When I dump
the database
Ross Boylan wrote:
I have a postgres server for which du reports
1188072 /var/lib/postgresql/8.2/main
on Linux system.
The server has only one real database, which is for bacula. When I dump
the database, it's 73Mg.
This is immediately after I did a full vacuum and restarted the server.
Also,
Leon Mergen wrote:
On 3/19/08, Erik Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Excuse me for bumping this up again, but I still don't understand how
>> to use this approach to sequentially walk through all different child
>> tables in one select, without having to JOIN these tables all the
>> ti
wstrzalka wrote:
Hi
Features like CREATE DATABASE WITH TEMPLATE or CREATE TABLE LIKE
are very usefull but it would be great to have such a feature on the
mid-level too. I mean something CREATE SCHEMA LIKE that would copy all
the template schema relations, etc...
What do you think about it ?
>-Original Message-
>From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Wednesday, 5 March 2008 0:29
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: Gregory Stark; Scott Marlowe; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Planner: rows=1 after "similar to"
>where co
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joris
>Dobbelsteen
>Sent: Monday, 25 February 2008 17:08
>To: Tom Lane
>Cc: Gregory Stark; Scott Marlowe; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Planner: rows=1 af
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gevik
>Babakhani
>Sent: Tuesday, 26 February 2008 22:30
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] win32: how to backup (dump does not work)
>
>> AFAIK stopping the serve
Resent due to bounce...
orange.nl #5.0.0 X-SMTP-Server; host sss.pgh.pa.us[66.207.139.130] said:
550
>-Original Message-
>From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, 25 February 2008 16:34
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: Gregory Stark; Scott Marlowe; pgsql-general
>-Original Message-
>From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, 25 February 2008 16:34
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: Gregory Stark; Scott Marlowe; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Planner: rows=1 after "similar to"
>where co
>-Original Message-
>From: Gregory Stark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, 25 February 2008 12:31
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: Scott Marlowe; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: Planner: rows=1 after "similar to" where condition.
>
>&qu
>-Original Message-
>From: Scott Marlowe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, 25 February 2008 7:14
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Planner: rows=1 after "similar to"
>where condition.
>
>O
I seem to have some planner oddity, where it seems to completely
mispredict the output after a regex compare. I've seem it on other
occasions, where it completely screws up the join. You can note the
"rows=1" after the filter.
A similar sitution has occurred when doing a regex filter in a subquery,
Dear,
I'm currently reading through the Postgresql documentation about how
several functions work and which ones I would need. So far the
documentation is great and well-structured!
Unfortunally I'm not sure what functions will actually do when some
non-obvious input is provided (which is sometim
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of dfx
>Sent: Sunday, 3 February 2008 10:38
>To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: [GENERAL] how to add array of objects to a record
>
>Hi list,
>
>Can I add an array of object to a record?
>
>For exampl
>-Original Message-
>From: Russell Aspinwall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: woensdag 17 oktober 2007 11:37
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] newbie question
>
>Joris Dobbelsteen wrote:
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: [EMAIL
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
>Russell Aspinwall
>Sent: woensdag 17 oktober 2007 9:34
>To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: [GENERAL] newbie question
>
>Hi,
>
>[snip] For example, if you had a
>built a database and application
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
>Magnus Hagander
>Sent: zaterdag 23 juni 2007 11:39
>To: Naz Gassiep
>Cc: Tony Caduto; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Proposed Feature
>
>Naz Gassiep wrote:
>> Hey,
>> I'm sure t
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Hunter
>Sent: woensdag 13 juni 2007 22:03
>To: Stefan Kaltenbrunner
>Cc: PostgreSQL General List
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] pointer to feature comparisons, please
>
>At 3:26p -0400 on 13 Jun 2007, Stefa
public key encyrption in a
database isn't going to help you securing your web server, is it? So
though considering a small part of the system, many important aspects
are already overlooked. Yet the weakest chain determines the strength of
the entire system.
Leave security to specialist, it's a really really hard to get right.
- Joris Dobbelsteen
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
>-Original Message-
>From: Francisco Reyes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: donderdag 24 mei 2007 2:04
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: PostgreSQL general
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Delete with subquery deleting all records
>
>Joris Dobbelsteen writes:
>
>>
Hint: LEFT JOIN is your mistake...
Thought: are you sure you are going to delete those rows? In there cases
human verification is usually the way to go, though it takes a lot of
time.
Read on...
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
>Franc
ensures data validity and
indicates its modified shortly.
Select for share - Low-level, concurrent, ensures data validity.
Hopefully this clears it up a bit.
- Joris Dobbelsteen
[snip]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
first statement is to prevent
serializable errors from happening.
>Hence, uncommitted changes should be invisible to serializable
>transaction.
Uncommited changes are at all times only and only visible to the
transaction that made those changes. No other transactions, of any
isolation level, can see un
web-site might not be the best, the mailing list is
quite active and a lot of knowledge is available.
In general high availability is complex and requires a lot of thought to
cover all possible cases.
[snip]
- Joris Dobbelsteen
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron Johnson
>Sent: donderdag 17 mei 2007 22:56
>To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Fault Tolerant Postgresql (two
>machines, two postmasters, one disk array)
>
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED
ilable on how to set up and getting it to work as desired.
The newer version 2 might provide more features than you actually need.
And since its newer there is fewer use.
I believe heartbeat is also one of the elements in redhats cluster
suite.
- Joris Dobbelsteen
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Please state
*
Which version of postgresql are you using?
*
Which exact commands are you executing?
*
What are the exact error messages?
Please be more precise. Your question is, I believe, too vague for the
community to offer good help with your probl
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marcelo de
Moraes Serpa
Sent: dinsdag 24 april 2007 21:06
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Audit-trail engine: getting the
application's layer
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John D. Burger
>Sent: zaterdag 7 april 2007 2:04
>To: Postgres General
>Subject: [GENERAL] New to concurrency
>
>For the first time, I find myself wanting to use some of PG's
>concurrency control stuff, a
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brandon Aiken
>Sent: woensdag 21 maart 2007 15:25
>To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Lifecycle of PostgreSQL releases
>
[snip]
>Software *always* has bugs.
Sorry, couldn't resist..
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Naz Gassiep
>Sent: zondag 18 maart 2007 14:45
>To: Naz Gassiep
>Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Design / Implementation problem
>
>Here it is again with more sensible wrapping:
>
>
e was nice: http://psti.equinoxbase.com/cgi-bin/handler.pl
- Joris
>-Original Message-
>From: Aaron Bingham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: donderdag 8 maart 2007 11:36
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: Merlin Moncure; postgres general
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] sql format
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: maandag 5 maart 2007 16:28
>To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: [GENERAL] Why don't dumped files parse in pgAdmin3
>query editor?
>
>Here's something I've always wondered
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shiva Sarna
>Sent: vrijdag 2 maart 2007 6:03
>To: Bill Moran; Joshua D. Drake
>Cc: Shiva Sarna; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] supporting 2000 simultaneous connections.
>
>Hi,
>
>Than
See the discussion "[GENERAL] Database versus filesystem for storing
images" earlier on the List.
It started at 31 december 2006 and ended 9 januari 2007.
It goes trough all/most pro/con arguments for different options.
- Joris
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>-Original Message-
>From: Martijn van Oosterhout [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: vrijdag 23 februari 2007 9:50
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] complex referential integrity constraints
>
>On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at
>-Original Message-
>From: Stephan Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: donderdag 22 februari 2007 23:13
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: Martijn van Oosterhout; Robert Haas; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] complex referential integrity constraints
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Martijn van Oosterhout [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: donderdag 22 februari 2007 23:15
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: Robert Haas; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] complex referential integrity constraints
>
>On Thu, Fe
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
>Martijn van Oosterhout
>Sent: donderdag 22 februari 2007 18:17
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: Robert Haas; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] complex referenti
>-Original Message-
>From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: donderdag 22 februari 2007 17:16
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Guarenteeing ordering constraints
>
>"Joris Dobbelsteen" <[EMA
>-Original Message-
>From: Robert Haas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: donderdag 22 februari 2007 15:58
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen; elein
>Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: RE: [GENERAL] complex referential integrity constraints
>
>The ability to make a
t;[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joris
>Dobbelsteen
>Sent: donderdag 22 februari 2007 14:27
>To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: [GENERAL] Guarenteeing ordering constraints
>
>I have some trouble guarenteeing that an ordering constraint
>is enforced on the databa
I have some trouble guarenteeing that an ordering constraint is enforced
on the database. On the table ordering (see below) I want to enforce
that for every tuple t, all tuples u where u.position < t.position this
implies u.cumvalue <= t.cumvalue.
Unfortunally postgresql gives me a choice between
ht be slightly harder.
This might be a fun project and useful for the TODO list. At least it
makes it a lot easier (and maintanable) to enforce database-wide
constraints.
- Joris
>-Original Message-
>From: Robert Haas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: woensdag 21 februari
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of elein
>Sent: zondag 18 februari 2007 23:16
>To: Robert Haas
>Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] complex referential integrity constraints
>
>On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 09:58:56AM -0500,
PostGreSQL (7.4 and onward) has such a thing build-in, but its not
particulary good (simple case works, but once it gets complex it makes a
mess out of it).
For example the postgresql formatted version
$CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW "Subquery" AS
$ SELECT t1.a, t2.b
$ FROM ( SELECT 1 AS a, 2 AS x) t1
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Panther
>Sent: dinsdag 30 januari 2007 7:07
>To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: [GENERAL] SELECT FOR UPDATE with ORDER BY to avoid
>row-level deadlock?
>
>Hi,
>
>My problem is that if I try to updat
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Willy-Bas Loos
Sent: dinsdag 30 januari 2007 9:41
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: [GENERAL] Unauthorized users can see db schema and read
functions
Hi,
I've noticed that any user who can logon to a db cluste
>-Original Message-
>From: Douglas McNaught [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: zondag 28 januari 2007 16:29
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: John Meyer; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] counting query
>
>"Joris Dobbelsteen" <[EMAIL PRO
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Meyer
>Sent: zondag 28 januari 2007 15:36
>To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] counting query
>
>Joris Dobbelsteen wrote:
>>>
>>> CREAT
ltering of the data to form sequential periods and more funny
things.
I believe all this can be done with plain SQL and you don't need any
python or plsql or other languages.
- Joris Dobbelsteen
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
I believe you should design it in a slightly different way:
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
>gustavo halperin
>Sent: donderdag 25 januari 2007 21:34
>To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: [GENERAL] triggers vs b-tree
>
>Hello I ha
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Wipf
>Sent: donderdag 25 januari 2007 22:42
>To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: [GENERAL] Duplicate key violation
>
>I got a duplicate key violation when the following query was performed:
>
hanging
>the performance characteristics so they're predictable and
>scalable. It doesn't matter much if your 1kb table is 100%
>slower than necessary but it does matter if your 1TB table
>needs 1,000x as much vacuuming as your 1GB table even if it's
>getting th
>-Original Message-
>From: Alvaro Herrera [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: dinsdag 9 januari 2007 22:18
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: Chris Browne; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Autovacuum Improvements
>
>Joris Dobbelsteen wrote:
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Alvaro Herrera [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: dinsdag 9 januari 2007 3:43
>To: Joris Dobbelsteen
>Cc: Chris Browne; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Autovacuum Improvements
>
>Joris Dobbelsteen wrote:
>> Wh
Why not collect some information from live databases and perform some
analysis on it?
Possible values required for (to be defined) vacuum heuristic,
Human classification of tables,
Updates/Transactions done (per table/db),
Growth of tables and indexes,
(all with respect to time I believe)
Collect
Try:
select blue.name, 'blue' from blue union select red.name, 'red' from
red;
Not tested, but that should work.
One thing to remember:
If blabla is in both blue and red, it will appear twice, instead of only
once as in your example.
- Joris
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
>Matthew O'Connor
>Sent: woensdag 20 december 2006 2:53
>To: Glen Parker; Postgres General
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Autovacuum Improvements
>
>Alvaro Herrera wrote:
[snip]
>I would go one step further and
I've set up a little test to find out how much permissions users have in
PostGreSQL.
It seems that the CONNECT privilege cannot be assigned or is not
recognized by postgresql 8.1.
When using pgAdmin-III it does not display the granted CONNECT
priviledge.
Also when doing GRANT CONNECT FOR DATABASE
80 matches
Mail list logo
