On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 3:28 PM Mark Dilger
wrote:
>
>
> > On Mar 2, 2021, at 5:20 AM, Joel Jacobson wrote:
> >
> > it's currently not possible to create an empty range with bounds
> information.
> >
> > This patch tries to improve the situation by keeping the bounds
> information,
> > and allow
On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 4:57 PM Mark Dilger
wrote:
>
>
> > On Mar 2, 2021, at 8:51 AM, Pantelis Theodosiou
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 3:28 PM Mark Dilger
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Mar 2, 2021, at 5:20 AM, J
DBMS has implemented this, except MariaDB. Tested
here:
https://dbfiddle.uk/?rdbms=mariadb_10.5&fiddle=565c22771fdfc746e05808a7da7a205f
SET @@standard_compliant_cte=0;
WITH RECURSIVE t(n) AS (
SELECT 1
UNION -- ALL
SELECT t.n + f.n
FROM t, t AS f
WHERE t.n < 4 AND f.n < 4
) SELECT * FROM t;
Result:
> | n |
> | -: |
> | 1 |
> | 2 |
> | 3 |
> | 4 |
> | 5 |
> | 6 |
Best regards
Pantelis Theodosiou
tching names and with NATURAL JOIN
(with extreme care).
Finally, extending the specs in this novel way might put Postgres in a
different path from the SQL specs in the future, especially if they have
plans to add functionality for graph queries.
Best regards
Pantelis Theodosiou
t let's try to pick something more specific than "value".
> (In the ROWS and GROUPS cases, maybe write "count"? Not entirely sure
> what to do for text that's trying to address all three cases, though.)
>
>
What about "extent_size" or just "size"? I see the SQL spec refers to
"preceding or following size" in an error message: ("data exception —
invalid preceding or following size in window function" )
Best regards
Pantelis Theodosiou
On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 10:07 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>
> That was also what seemed to be the consensus coming out of the FOSDEM
> Developer meeting (notes here:
> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/FOSDEM/PGDay_2018_Developer_Meeting).
>
>
In the notes there is this, which confused me:
> SIDE TO
te for the differences
between INSERT/SET and UPDATE/SET syntax.
On a related not, column aliases can be used in ORDER BY, e.g:
insert into t (a, b)
select
a + 20,
b - 2 * a as f
from t
order by f desc
limit 3 ;
Would that be expressed as follows?:
insert into t
set
a = a + 20,
b = b - 2 * a as f
from t
order by f desc
limit 3 ;
Best regards,
Pantelis Theodosiou
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 1:01 PM Jonathan S. Katz
wrote:
> On 5/23/19 1:45 AM, David Rowley wrote:
> > On Thu, 23 May 2019 at 15:31, Jonathan S. Katz
> wrote:
> >> Attached is
> >> v3 of the patch, along with a diff.
> >
> > Minor details, but this query is not valid:
> >
> >> WITH c AS MATERIALI
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 4:36 PM Pantelis Theodosiou
wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 1:01 PM Jonathan S. Katz
> wrote:
>
>> On 5/23/19 1:45 AM, David Rowley wrote:
>> > On Thu, 23 May 2019 at 15:31, Jonathan S. Katz
>> wrote:
>> >> Attache
On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 4:57 AM David G. Johnston
wrote:
...
>
>
> I'm referring to the query:
>
> select any_value(v order by v) from (values (2),(1),(3)) as vals (v);
> // produces 1, per the documented implementation-defined behavior.
>
> Someone writing:
>
> select any_value(v) from (values (2)
ATERAL subqueries, eg
select t.col1, level1.col2_1, level2.col3_1
from your_table as t
lateral join
(select t.col2*20 as col2_1) as level1 on true
lateral join
(select level1.col2_1*200 as col3_1) as level2 on true ;
>
> Will Postgres plan to support this feature?
>
> Thanks a lot!
Regards
Pantelis Theodosiou
> Upgrading to PostgreSQL 15 Beta 2
> -
>
> To upgrade to PostgreSQL 15 Beta 2 from an earlier version of PostgreSQL,
> you will need to use a strategy similar to upgrading between major versions of
> PostgreSQL (e.g. `pg_upgrade` or `pg_dump` / `pg_restore`). For mo
On Thu, Jun 6, 2024 at 1:25 PM Radu Radutiu wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I have a query that forces an out of memory error, where the OS will kill
> the postgresql process.
> The query plan (run immediately after a vacuum analyze) is at
> https://explain.depesz.com/s/ITQI#html .
>
> ...
>
> Any idea
On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 1:11 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> David Rowley writes:
> > Maybe I'm slow on the uptake, but I've yet to see anything here where
> > time literals act in a special way DEFAULT constraints. This is why I
> > couldn't understand why we should be adding documentation about this
> >
On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 5:03 AM Bruce Momjian wrote
>
>
> I welcome feedback. For some reason it was an easier job than usual.
This looks better if "more case" -> "more cases" :
> Allow query nodes to be run in parallel in more case (Tom Lane)
ansaction - they are visible inside the transaction and usable by it, so
> > considering them
> > dead and cleaning up during execution is a bad idea until the transaction
> > is ended.
>
> But once they are deleted or updated, even the transaction that created them
>
On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 6:58 PM Joshua Drake wrote:
> -Hackers,
>
> I came across this today [1], "
> 3 Results
>
> In most respects, PostgreSQL behaved as expected: both read uncommitted
> and read committed prevent write skew and aborted reads. We observed no
> internal consistency violations.
e the Utility to include all?)
> Add FOREIGN to ALTER statements, if appropriate (Luis Carril)
> WHAT IS THIS ABOUT?
- The "WHAT IS THIS ABOUT?" should be removed, in my opinion.
Again, congrats for another release of the best database in the world.
Pantelis Theodosiou
On Thu, May
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 3:20 PM Pantelis Theodosiou
wrote:
> Congrats to all for the release of a new major version!
>
> Two questions:
> - Why is VACUUM together with FETCH FIRST WITH TIES, CREATE TABLE LIKE,
> ALTER VIEW, ALTER TABLE, etc in Utility Commands section?
> Sh
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 10:32 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> On 2018-Aug-07, Lætitia Avrot wrote:
>
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > I understand what you're pointing at and I agree that it could be a good
> > thing to be able to dump/restore a table without problem.
> >
> > My point was that check constraints
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 6:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Mark Dilger writes:
>
> > I don't have a strong opinion on that. I could also look to upgrade
> > to a newer version. Generally, I try to build using the oldest
> > supported version rather than the newest. What is the next oldest
> > working
On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Konstantin Knizhnik <
k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
>
>
> On 05.09.2017 04:02, Amit Langote wrote:
>
> Like Thomas, I'm not so sure about the whole predtest.c patch. The core
> logic in operator_predicate_proof() should be able to conclude that, say,
> k < 21 i
On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 4:26 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
> > On 12/20/17 10:29, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Please say that's just an Oracle-ism and not SQL standard, because it's
> >> formally ambiguous.
>
> > The SQL standard syntax appears to be something like
>
> > "tablename" [
ons act only on the rows of the window frame,
rather than of the whole partition. By default, if ORDER BY is supplied
then the frame consists of all rows from the start of the partition up
through the current row, plus any following rows that are equal to the
current row according to the ORDER BY claus
24 matches
Mail list logo
