Sr DBA:80-120k (several years DBA experience plus extensive knowledge)
Anyone feel like correcting me?
--
Rob Wultsch
wult...@gmail.com
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
nstance PG
will likely have a significant advantage over Innodb for that reason.
*Pretend to be a developer and install MySQL on windows. You will
probably not get a MyISAM default.
--
Rob Wultsch
wult...@gmail.com
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Rob Wultsch wrote:
>> - Innodb : The primary transactional storage engine for MySQL. It does
>> not have all the features of PG (like check contraints), but it has
>> some featu
n place.
>
> Things may be a LOT better by now. I'd certainly hope so. But I have
> no real confidence or evidence of such an internal change.
Sun/Oracle has improved things a lot. Long standing bugs are being
closed and it feels like more care is being put into releases.
--
Ro
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 1:44 AM, Dave Page wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Rob Wultsch wrote:
>> MySQL has several full text search solutions. The built in MyISAM
>> solution is the best known, but there is also an engine for using
>> sphinx.
>>
>> ...
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Jim Montgomery wrote:
> Remove me from your email chain.
>
Remove yourself.
--
Rob Wultsch
wult...@gmail.com
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 1:22 AM, John Gage wrote:
> There are features, are there not, that Postgres has that MySQL does not
> have?
>
> I refer in particular to things like tsvector.
>
> Am I mistaken in this?
>
> John
>
>
> On Jun 25, 2010, at 3:46 AM, Rob Wults
t integer value: '' for column 'i' at row 1
If it were me I would generally work with whichever system I knew
better unless there was a specific reason to migrate. Both systems
will be a bit of a pain as they are both complicated. C'est la vie.
All else being equal I would
gres only thinks matches 766.
>
> Is this a bug in postgres?
>
>
> --
> mvh Björn
>
You probably want to run "analyze" or "vacuum analyze" to update
statistics. Do you have auto vacuum setup?
--
Rob Wultsch
wult...@gmail.com
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
nguage and internal functions, and 100 units
for functions in all other languages. Larger values cause the planner
to try to avoid evaluating the function more often than necessary. "
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/interactive/sql-createfunction.html
--
Rob Wultsch
wult...@gmail.com
-
o the HAVING. This is often done without a
specific GROUP BY. The MySQL optimizer does not deal with this well.
When would it make logical sense to have a HAVING clause that deals with a
column that is not inside a aggregating function?
--
Rob Wultsch
wult...@gmail.com
a reply (not reply all --- remove
> original author) should go back to the list where I am subscribed at, in in
> my opinion the source is the list aswell (that's why I am getting it in the
> first place).
>
I know of at least one other list that is similar: MySQL.
And I brought it up a year ago with no eventual change:
http://lists.mysql.com/mysql/209593
After a while you just get used to hitting reply all when you mean to reply
all. I now prefer (though not strongly) this setting.
--
Rob Wultsch
On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 11:57 AM, Ram Ravichandran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ..."High Performance MySQL" ...
BTW: The current version of this book is (somewhat) out of date, and
the next version will be released in next few months.
--
Rob Wultsch
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Sen
rces or interest to maintain an ever-increasing
> number of back branches.
>
> regards, tom lane
Not really Postgres's problem, but for whatever its worth if I do the
following on Debian stable:
$apt-get install postgresql
I get 7.4 . When I install Debi
h female phenotype
> > transgender with male phenotype
> >
> > and you should be set from current medical science's point
> > of view ;-)
> >
>
> The standard is unknown, male, female, and n/a.
Both unknown and n/a sounds like NULL to me.
--
Rob Wult
Postgres environment.
--
Rob Wultsch
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
16 matches
Mail list logo