On Oct 27, 2006, at 5:29 AM, Stefano B. wrote:
I have investigate about the possibility of load (in the client
side) only a small subset of the resultset but with no luck. In the
maling lists I see that the only way to load the resultset
incrementally is to define a forward only resultset w
On Tuesday 10 October 2006 15:19, stig erikson wrote:
> Hi.
> Are there any plans to implement CUBE, ROLLUP and/or GROUPING SETS in
> future PostgreSQL versions? I could not find any info on the TODO-page.
>
I've heard people mention it, but no one has ever come up with a solid
proposal or patch.
> Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have a simple question about auto-vacuuming. We are running a Postgres
>> 8.1 and I've noticed that some of the tables are not analyzed by the
>> pg_autovacuum daemon. That is - when I select the rows from pg_class,
>> all the important values (relpages, r
On Saturday 28 October 2006 07:11, pelibali wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 00:33:26 -1000
>
> Susemail <.> wrote:
> > I reboot my laptop with openSUSE-10.2-Beta1-i386-mini.iso in the cd drive
> > but it boots to the grub menu every time. The laptop will boot the 10.0
> > cd Is there somethi
2006/10/28, Robert Treat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Tuesday 10 October 2006 15:19, stig erikson wrote:
Are there any plans to implement CUBE, ROLLUP and/or GROUPING SETS in
future PostgreSQL versions? I could not find any info on the TODO-page.
I've heard people mention it, but no one has ever
I am new to PostgreSQL and just beginning to learn the product. I will
probrobably be using it exclusively on Windows.
I was surprised to learn that PostgreSQL creates a new process for each
connection. Doesn't this severely limit its scalability by consuming
resources rapidly on the server as the
Bill wrote:
> I am new to PostgreSQL and just beginning to learn the product. I will
> probrobably be using it exclusively on Windows.
>
> I was surprised to learn that PostgreSQL creates a new process for each
> connection. Doesn't this severely limit its scalability by consuming
> resources rapi
On Oct 29, 2006, at 02:31 , Bill wrote:
I was surprised to learn that PostgreSQL creates a new process for
each
connection. Doesn't this severely limit its scalability by consuming
resources rapidly on the server as the number of user increases?
On Windows, yes; Win32 processes carry a not i
On Saturday 28 October 2006 19:47, Nicolas Barbier wrote:
> 2006/10/28, Robert Treat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > On Tuesday 10 October 2006 15:19, stig erikson wrote:
> >> Are there any plans to implement CUBE, ROLLUP and/or GROUPING SETS in
> >> future PostgreSQL versions? I could not find any info o
"Joshua D. Drake" wrote:
> Bill wrote:
> > I am new to PostgreSQL and just beginning to learn the product. I
> > will probrobably be using it exclusively on Windows.
> >
> > I was surprised to learn that PostgreSQL creates a new process for
> > each connection. Doesn't this severely limit its sca
>> So in answer to your question, in general -- no the process
>> methodology we use does not limit scalability and it makes our code
>> base much simpler that the equivalent threading model.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Joshua D. Drake
>
> Thanks. How much memory does PostgreSQL consume with 2000 con
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw when [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Nicolas Barbier")
would write:
> 2006/10/28, Robert Treat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> On Tuesday 10 October 2006 15:19, stig erikson wrote:
>>
>>> Are there any plans to implement CUBE, ROLLUP and/or GROUPING SETS in
>>> future PostgreSQL v
12 matches
Mail list logo
