Query is:
SELECT * FROM a UNION SELECT * FROM b ORDER BY time DESC LIMIT 100
how can i get only last 100 row from a and b and then do union. Explain of
select said that all recond selected from a and b.
thanks.
On 23/11/2011 10:56, Капралов Александр wrote:
> Query is:
> SELECT * FROM a UNION SELECT * FROM b ORDER BY time DESC LIMIT 100
>
> how can i get only last 100 row from a and b and then do union. Explain
> of select said that all recond selected from a and b.
(select * from a order by time desc
Hi,
(SELECT * FROM a limit 10) union (SELECT * FROM b limit 10)
is what you need
Bèrto
2011/11/23 Капралов Александр
> Query is:
> SELECT * FROM a UNION SELECT * FROM b ORDER BY time DESC LIMIT 100
>
> how can i get only last 100 row from a and b and then do union. Explain of
> select said t
Στις Wednesday 23 November 2011 12:56:23 ο/η Капралов Александр έγραψε:
> Query is:
> SELECT * FROM a UNION SELECT * FROM b ORDER BY time DESC LIMIT 100
>
> how can i get only last 100 row from a and b and then do union. Explain of
> select said that all recond selected from a and b.
>
In order
Respected All,
Today on my local box, I observed crash and when I started Instance my
beginning line of new pg_log's look like this.
2011-11-23 17:18:14 IST [2958]: [1-1] LOG: database system was
interrupted; last known up at *2011-11-23 00:45:43 IST*
2011-11-23 17:18:14 IST [2958]: [2-1] LO
---
Пользователь Капралов Александр хочет общаться с Вами, используя
новейшие продукты Google. Если у Вас уже установлен Gmail или Google
Talk, перейдите на страницу
http://mail.google.com/mail/b-f536b5aea-955d3fea97-i7pB5IcEv3GSX
---
Пользователь Капралов Александр хочет общаться с Вами, используя
новейшие продукты Google. Если у Вас уже установлен Gmail или Google
Talk, перейдите на страницу
http://mail.google.com/mail/b-f536b5aea-9238018186--lZdHgynL2Qd2
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 7:35 PM, Raghavendra <
raghavendra@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> Respected All,
>
> Today on my local box, I observed crash and when I started Instance my
> beginning line of new pg_log's look like this.
>
> 2011-11-23 17:18:14 IST [2958]: [1-1] LOG: database system was
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 16:59, Raghavendra
wrote:
>
> Just to clear my question, am looking for this "last known up at 2011-11-23
> 00:45:43 IST" line information recorded in any pg_catalogs ?
How would it read that from a catalog if the cluster didn't recover
from the crash yet?
I'd think it's
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 8:35 PM, Alex Shulgin wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 16:59, Raghavendra
> wrote:
> >
> > Just to clear my question, am looking for this "last known up
> at 2011-11-23
> > 00:45:43 IST" line information recorded in any pg_catalogs ?
>
> How would it read that from a cata
Alex Shulgin writes:
> How would it read that from a catalog if the cluster didn't recover
> from the crash yet?
> I'd think it's looking at last-modified timestamps of some of the
> PGDATA files instead.
No, it's looking at a last-update timestamp field in pg_control.
r
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 9:01 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alex Shulgin writes:
> > How would it read that from a catalog if the cluster didn't recover
> > from the crash yet?
>
> > I'd think it's looking at last-modified timestamps of some of the
> > PGDATA files instead.
>
> No, it's looking at a last
Hi:
I have a pg_dump pf a v8.3.4 DB that I would like to bring into a v9.0.1 PG
instance. What is the best way to do this? Note, the dump file is too big to
fit into an editor, but I could sed it if need be.
Thanks.
On 11/23/2011 08:08 AM, Gauthier, Dave wrote:
Hi:
I have a pg_dump pf a v8.3.4 DB that I would like to bring into a v9.0.1
PG instance. What is the best way to do this? Note, the dump file is too
big to fit into an editor, but I could sed it if need be.
Did you do the data dump using the 8.3.4
I used pg_dump v 8.3.4, but I could rerun using v9.0.1. I was thinking that
pg_dump v9 would refuse to play right with the v8 DB. Is that a false
assumption?
-Original Message-
From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:adrian.kla...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2011 11:48 AM
To: Gauth
On 11/23/2011 08:50 AM, Gauthier, Dave wrote:
I used pg_dump v 8.3.4, but I could rerun using v9.0.1. I was thinking that
pg_dump v9 would refuse to play right with the v8 DB. Is that a false
assumption?
Yes.
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/interactive/app-pgdump.html
"Because pg_dump
Raghavendra writes:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 9:01 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> No, it's looking at a last-update timestamp field in pg_control.
> So, Is it a approximate time of crash on the basis of last-modified
> timestamp of pg_control file ?
IIRC, that's going to be the time of last checkpoint
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 10:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Raghavendra writes:
> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 9:01 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> No, it's looking at a last-update timestamp field in pg_control.
>
> > So, Is it a approximate time of crash on the basis of last-modified
> > timestamp of pg_contro
I am trying to load 143K rows into a postgres-9.0.5 table from an ASCII
text file. The file consists of INSERT INTO ... statements and the VALUES
are comma delimited. One column is numeric (REAL), but ~10K rows have that
value missing, and postgres rejects the lines.
The column does not have
Hello,
Is it possible to rename columns in a WITH clause which includes VALUES?
None of the following parse:
WITH map_table AS
(
VALUES ('1','r'),('2','w'),('3','a'),('4','d')
) AS (a,b)
SELECT * FROM map_table;
WITH map_table AS
(
VALUES ('1','r'),('2','w'),('3','a'),('4','d') AS t (a
It is described in the "SELECT" documentation "WITH" section but is somewhat
obscure; just add the column names, in (), after the WITH name.
WITH name (col1, col2, col3) AS (
SELECT 1, 2, 3
)
David J.
-Original Message-
From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-gener
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Rich Shepard wrote:
> Originally I had two commas in sequence since there were no values between
> them. Next I tried a space between the two commas. I tried searching in the
> 9.0.5 manual for 'missing values', 'missing', and another term I don't
> recall but f
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011, Richard Broersma wrote:
My pg.dump files show nulls as:
\N
Richard,
Mine do, too. But, that's not what postgres wants to see in the .sql file.
It takes it as a newline (\n) whether quoted or not.
Thanks,
Rich
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@post
Rich Shepard writes:
>Mine do, too. But, that's not what postgres wants to see in the .sql file.
In an insert command, you need to either write NULL or omit the column
from the column list; empty expressions aren't syntactically correct.
(Note that the latter option actually results in insert
Running Postgresql 9.0.5 on Ubuntu 10.10, we just saw:
PGError: ERROR: could not open relation with OID 39008
SELECT questions.*, r.relevance as score, r.explanation as explanation
FROM "questions"
INNER JOIN "users" ON "users"."id" = "questions"."user_id"
JOIN relevance(13218) AS r
ON question
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011, Tom Lane wrote:
In an insert command, you need to either write NULL or omit the column
from the column list; empty expressions aren't syntactically correct.
(Note that the latter option actually results in inserting the column's
default, not necessarily null...)
Tom,
I
I'm trying to compile a parser for full text searching starting from the
code in this example:
http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/postgres/gist/tsearch/V2/docs/HOWTO-parser-tsearch2.html
I'm using Code::block with MinGW on a Windows Seven x64 and I get these
errors:
..\..\..\Program Files\PostgreSQ
Hi,
I am upgrading a system from postgresql 8.4.8 (fedora 13 x64) to postgresql
9.0.5 (fedora 15 x64). As I build a database I've noticed that the following
works on 8.4.8 but does not work on 9.0.5. Can someone tell me why this is not
legal syntax in 9.0.5 but is legal in 8.4.8 please:
===snip
Hi Robert,
Thanks for ur views, I got an advice from a DB professional
Raghavendra Rao as below it worked
From your contrib/pg_standby location you need to first set the path
for pg_config and do ./configure or directly make, make install. This
will create pg_standby executable in pos
Hello
http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/release-9-0.html
PL/pgSQL no longer allows variable names that match certain reserved
words (Tom Lane)
use double quotes
rec."open" = 32;
Regards
Pavel Stehule
2011/11/23 Chris McDonald :
> Hi,
> I am upgrading a system from postgresql
Chris McDonald writes:
> Hi, I am upgrading a system from postgresql 8.4.8 (fedora 13 x64) to
> postgresql 9.0.5 (fedora 15 x64). As I build a database I've noticed
> that the following works on 8.4.8 but does not work on 9.0.5. Can
> someone tell me why this is not legal syntax in 9.0.5 but is l
Antonio Franzoso writes:
> I'm using Code::block with MinGW on a Windows Seven x64 and I get these
> errors:
> ..\..\..\Program Files\PostgreSQL\9.0\include\server\c.h|284|error:
> #error must have a working 64-bit integer datatype|
Um ... did you run the configure script? In a MinGW environm
Chris McDonald writes:
> Hi, I am upgrading a system from postgresql 8.4.8 (fedora 13 x64) to
> postgresql 9.0.5 (fedora 15 x64). As I build a database I've noticed
> that the following works on 8.4.8 but does not work on 9.0.5. Can
> someone tell me why this is not legal syntax in 9.0.5 but is l
I'm trying to put together a very simple web application to display
information about any table in my database that a web user wants to see.
The general idea is to present a list of schemata and their associated
tables to the user who then picks one, which causes the server to send
the list of
On 11/23/2011 01:54 PM, Bill Thoen wrote:
Am I digging too deep here, or what am I missing? Is there a better way
to tranfer info between my database and the web than by using a generic
account? It sure seems like I'm granting too much access to too little a
player. Any advice would be welcome.
Jerry Sievers writes:
> Hmmm, I do not see that open is a reserved word but the PL must be
> treating it special somehow.
plpgsql has a different list of reserved words than the main SQL grammar
does. I don't think we explicitly document it anywhere, but pretty much
any keyword that can start a
Am 23.11.2011 22:54, schrieb Bill Thoen:
> I'm getting the list of schemata from the information_schema.schemata
> table, and using my superuser account it works fine. However, using the
> account I've set up for this job isn't getting very far and I'm getting
> nothing returned. I've granted permi
OK, I see it is the term open which fails the syntax checker - I guessed this
might be because open is a reserved word but
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/interactive/sql-keywords-appendix.html does
not indicate whether open is either reserved or not in postgresql.
Checking 8.4 doco,
http:/
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:13 AM, Steve Crawford
wrote:
>
..
> The information in the pgbouncer pseudo-database is helpful, here (psql -U
> youradminuser -h 127.0.0.1 pgbouncer).
Thanks, I finally got it connecting.
Where's the "pgbouncer" database. Do I need to install it? It's not install
On Wednesday, November 23, 2011 11:43:04 am Chris McDonald wrote:
> OK, I see it is the term open which fails the syntax checker - I guessed
> this might be because open is a reserved word but
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/interactive/sql-keywords-appendix.html
> does not indicate whether op
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Phoenix Kiula wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:13 AM, Steve Crawford
...
>
Thanks, I finally got it connecting.
Where's the "pgbouncer" database. Do I need to install it? It's not
installed. (How else should I tell the load and utilization?)
Also, how can I
On Wednesday, November 23, 2011 5:31:10 pm Phoenix Kiula wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Phoenix Kiula
wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:13 AM, Steve Crawford
>
> ...
>
>
>
> Thanks, I finally got it connecting.
>
> Where's the "pgbouncer" database. Do I need to install it? It's
Chris McDonald writes:
> Still interested in a definitive answer, but the fix for me appears to be
> simply to change the word open to something else.
Well, if you want a definitive answer, you can consult the list of
plpgsql reserved words here:
http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.gi
43 matches
Mail list logo
