Le mardi 27 septembre 2011 à 13:19 -0700, Rich Shepard a écrit :
> On Tue, 27 Sep 2011, John R Pierce wrote:
>
> > to use ODBC, you'd need to give it the DSN information, I don't know the
> > exact format, but in general, its something like
> >
> > [PostgreSQL]
> > Description = Po
On 28/09/11 13:43, Johan De Meersman wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Adarsh Sharma"
>>
>> This Link gives the capitals of all countries but I need the states
>> and their capitals in all these countries too..
>> But I think this is not possible because very few countries are
>>
I can start postgresql but there is error
2011-09-28 15:09:37 ICT LOG: database system was interrupted; last known up
at 2011-09-26 08:03:39 ICT
2011-09-28 15:09:37 ICT LOG: database system was not properly shut down;
automatic recovery in progress
2011-09-28 15:09:37 ICT LOG: consistent recove
On 28/09/11 01:50, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 09/28/2011 01:01 AM, David North wrote:
testdb=# select * from problem_table;
ERROR: invalid memory alloc request size 2003676411
What Pg version are you using?
On which platform?
32-bit or 64-bit OS? If 64-bit, with a 32-bit or 64-bit build of
Pos
Craig Ringer wrote:
On 28/09/11 13:43, Johan De Meersman wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Adarsh Sharma"
This Link gives the capitals of all countries but I need the states
and their capitals in all these countries too..
But I think this is not possible because very few coun
Hello,
I have two views both contain identical column names , order and types except
the primary keys. I want to match these two views - return the pk pair of the
rows which match from these views - by comparing all the column values. I want
to write a pgplsql function to do this Job by ite
On 28 September 2011 13:19, salah jubeh wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I have two views both contain identical column names , order and types
> except the primary keys. I want to match these two views - return the pk
> pair of the rows which match from these views - by comparing all the column
> values.
Hi All,
I am trying to retrieve the contact names based on the keyed search string. It
performs good for the English alphabets and behaves strangely for special chars
such as _,/,\,%
My query in the function is similar to
SELECT contact_name FROM contacts WHERE LOWER(contact_name) LIKE
LOWER(
Hi All,
I am trying to retrieve the contact names based on the keyed search string. It
performs good for the English alphabets and behaves strangely for special chars
such as _,/,\,%
My query in the function is similar to
SELECT contact_name FROM contacts WHERE LOWER(contact_name) LIKE
LOWER(
On Wed, 28 Sep 2011, Vincent Veyron wrote:
I'm not sure what 'INSTALL INTO ... statements' are, but are you aware
of the very convenient 'M-x sql-postgres' in emacs?
Vincent,
I have a SQL major mode for emacs. Don't know that it's specific to
postgres but it is automatically invoked when I
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 01:51:42PM -0700, Gauthier, Dave wrote:
> Hi:
>
> How does one make a metadata change to a DB that's actively being
> used. Specifically, I want to drop a view, drop some columns from a
> table that's used in the view, recreate the view without those
> columns.
>
> In the
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 04:52:08PM -0300, Diego Augusto Molina wrote:
> 2011/9/27, Diego Augusto Molina :
> > Honestly, I don't remember why I used triggers instead of rules in the
> > "audit" and "audet" tables.
>
> I remember now, that's because in my case, operations over tuples are
> done very
2011/9/27, Merlin Moncure :
> *) when posting schema definitions, particularly in email format, try
> not to use dumped definitions from pg_dump or pgadmin. This creates a
> lot of noise in the script that detracts from what you are trying to
> do. Also an attached file would probably have been m
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 06:20:04AM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
>
> There's an even better reason not to use rules: they're going away in
> a not too distant version of PostgreSQL.
Really? How? I thought views were done using rules under the hood?
Also, it'd be awfully nice if, in case rules are
Andrew Sullivan writes:
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 06:20:04AM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
>> There's an even better reason not to use rules: they're going away in
>> a not too distant version of PostgreSQL.
> Really? How? I thought views were done using rules under the hood?
> Also, it'd be awfu
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 10:34:32AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think the true state of affairs is this: rules have a lot of
> surprising behaviors, and if we could think of something that works more
> straightforwardly, we'd love to replace them.
Oh. Well, _that's_ not news :-)
--
Andrew Sulli
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Diego Augusto Molina
wrote:
> 2011/9/27, Merlin Moncure :
>> *) when posting schema definitions, particularly in email format, try
>> not to use dumped definitions from pg_dump or pgadmin. This creates a
>> lot of noise in the script that detracts from what you are
Is something like this what you are trying to do?
somedb=# create table a (a int, b text, c date);
CREATE TABLE
somedb=# create table b (a int, b text, c date);
CREATE TABLE
somedb=# select * from a join b using (a, b, c);
a | b | c
---+---+---
(0 rows)
somedb=# insert into a values (1, 'test',
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 3:28 AM, David North wrote:
> On 28/09/11 01:50, Craig Ringer wrote:
>>
>> On 09/28/2011 01:01 AM, David North wrote:
>>
>>> testdb=# select * from problem_table;
>>> ERROR: invalid memory alloc request size 2003676411
>>
>> What Pg version are you using?
>>
>> On which pla
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 7:34 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think the true state of affairs is this: rules have a lot of
> surprising behaviors, and if we could think of something that works more
> straightforwardly, we'd love to replace them. But I think we'd have to
> have the "something" in place be
Thanks Chris, this solution is one alternative, but it will not work in my app
because the join condition in your example is defined using all the fields. in
my case the join condition is unknown. if a row in the first view is a subset
of a row in the second view that means there is a match.
Chris Travers writes:
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 7:34 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think the true state of affairs is this: rules have a lot of
>> surprising behaviors, and if we could think of something that works more
>> straightforwardly, we'd love to replace them.
> I guess my question is what it
2011/9/28, Merlin Moncure :
> Yup -- I get it now. Well, one point about this is that it seems
> directed towards your personal requirements. This is a very 'heavy'
> audit system that will not be suitable for high performance
> transactional systems. That said, it looks well thought out. Storin
In article <4116.1317226...@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
Tom Lane writes:
> Not sure this specific proposal makes any sense at all. IMO the only
> real advantage that rules have over triggers is that they work on a
> set-operation basis not a tuple-by-tuple basis.
Isn't that what statement-level triggers ar
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Harald Fuchs wrote:
> In article <4116.1317226...@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
> Tom Lane writes:
>
>> Not sure this specific proposal makes any sense at all. IMO the only
>> real advantage that rules have over triggers is that they work on a
>> set-operation basis not a tup
Hello Everyone,
I have been working on PostgreSQL for quite a while (2 yrs) now.
I have got "PostgreSQL 9.0 High Performance" book and quite excited to go
through it.
Please let me know any source where i can get more books on PG, I am
especially looking for books on PG internals, architecture,
First, thanks for your thoughtful reply.
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> You're certainly right that unexpected multiple evaluations of volatile
> expressions is the first thing that bites people. (I don't believe
> that's restricted to DO ALSO vs INSTEAD though.)
I am hav
On 09/28/2011 08:34 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Sullivan writes:
>> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 06:20:04AM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
>>> There's an even better reason not to use rules: they're going away in
>>> a not too distant version of PostgreSQL.
>> Really? How? I thought views were done us
I don't know if this has been changed in 9.1 but in 9.0.5 we were
trying to set up streaming replication and kept getting the warning
about wal_level=minimal and hence hot standby not being possible. It
was the same message as this (found in one of the emails I found when
researching the problem):
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Diego Augusto Molina
wrote:
> 2011/9/28, Merlin Moncure :
>> Yup -- I get it now. Well, one point about this is that it seems
>> directed towards your personal requirements. This is a very 'heavy'
>> audit system that will not be suitable for high performance
>>
The same publisher (Packt) has a book *PostgreSQL 9 Administration Cookbook* by
Simon Riggs and Hannu Krosing that is equally useful as Greg's *High
Performance* book
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Venkat Balaji wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> I have been working on PostgreSQL for quite a while (2
On my windows install of postgres 9.1.0.
I have a search_path set in the config file. This search path has
several schemas defined.
Some of the databases within postgres, do not have the schema specified
on the search path defined within the database.
Trying to add pgcryto via:
CREATE EXTENS
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Rob Sargent wrote:
>
>
> On 09/28/2011 08:34 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andrew Sullivan writes:
>>> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 06:20:04AM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
There's an even better reason not to use rules: they're going away in
a not too distant version
On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 12:33 +0530, Siva Palanisamy wrote:
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> I am trying to retrieve the contact names based on the keyed search
> string. It performs good for the English alphabets and behaves
> strangely for special chars such as _,/,\,%
>
>
The % character is used by SQL
On Sep 28, 2011, at 7:19, salah jubeh wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I have two views both contain identical column names , order and types
> except the primary keys. I want to match these two views - return the pk pair
> of the rows which match from these views - by comparing all the column
> v
Hi,
> folks, don't use RULES! use triggers -- and as much as possible, keep
> triggers simple, short, and to the point (simple validation, custom
> RI, auditing/logging, etc).
I like them :). 'DO INSTEAD' rules are great for partitioning so you
can insert (or update) to parent table and 'DO INSTE
Is is possible within a stored procedure to read all the tables in a
schema into a list?
From that list and for each table is it possible to find the foreign
keys in that table?
From that list of foreign keys, is it possible to find out which field
in which table the FK corresponds to?
I n
Is it possible to group a bunch of methods and functions into a single
file (stored procedures & functions) and have a main method that can be
called
to orchestrate the methods, pass in params, get back results, log to a file?
I know this can be done with Oracle PL/SQL but a simple google on th
On 09/28/11 6:33 PM, J.V. wrote:
Is is possible within a stored procedure to read all the tables in a
schema into a list?
From that list and for each table is it possible to find the foreign
keys in that table?
From that list of foreign keys, is it possible to find out which field
in which
Thanks Adam !
Regards,
VB
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:03 AM, Adam Cornett wrote:
> The same publisher (Packt) has a book *PostgreSQL
> 9 Administration Cookbook* by Simon Riggs and Hannu Krosing that is
> equally useful as Greg's *High Performance* book
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Venk
40 matches
Mail list logo
