On 12 Oct 2002 at 8:54, Giles Lean wrote:
> Portable code uses 'unsigned char' when using ctype.h features, even
> though for many platforms where 'char' is an unsigned type it's not
> necessary for correct functioning.
>
> I don't see any isspace() or similar in the code though, so I'm not
> sur
Oh yes, I agree. ALTER TABLE ... DROP COLUMN helps out a lot. I actually don't
use that for much yet because 7.3 is still in beta. However, I certainly
can't complain to the developers for it since it's already developed :)
I am consistantly amazed by every minor version release. If postgres ha
On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 07:08:18PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> And it really is a minor matter of convenience. I end up dropping and
> recreating all my tables a lot in the early stages of development, which is
> mildly annoying. Certainly not as bad, I suppose, as if you're led to believe
> tha
>
> I still remember a post from somebody on the phpbuilder site that had
> changed a field from varchar to date and all the dates he had got changed
> to -00-00.
>
> He most unimpressed, especially since he (being typical of a lot of MySQL
> users) didn't have a backup.
>
Ah, yes. Classic.
I
> Well, this is not related to postgresql exactly but to summerise the
> problem, with libc patch PHCO_19090 or compatible upwards, on
> HP-UX11, isspace does not work correctly if input value is >127.
o isspace() and such are defined in the standards to operate on characters
o for historic C rea
scott.marlowe wrote:
On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, Jeff Davis wrote:
I agree with your message except for that statement. MySQL alter table
provides the ability to change column types and cast the records
automatically. I remember that feature as really the only thing from MySQL
that I've ever missed.
> They also state that they have more sophisticated ALTER TABLE...
>
> Only usable feature in their ALTER TABLE that doesn't (yet) exist in
> PostgreSQL was changing column order (ok, the order by in table creation
> could be nice), and that's still almost purely cosmetic. Anyway, I could
> have us
On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > They also state that they have more sophisticated ALTER TABLE...
> >
> > Only usable feature in their ALTER TABLE that doesn't (yet) exist in
> > PostgreSQL was changing column order (ok, the order by in table creation
> > could be nice), and that's still
Can You do this :
We save 1000 (or fetchSize rows) first from beginning
If table have < 1000 rows we save all rows, but if table have more rows
and user request 1001 we fetch 1000 (again from begining, but skip 1000 rows
or maybe continue fetching, if it possible)
When user request last w
Hello,
I sometimes need to perform client-side merges, sometimes between two
tables on the same database, sometimes between two different databases.
When the merge key is numeric all goes well but, when the merge key is a
string a problem arises: string comparison operators often behave
diff
For give me for responding to the beginning of this thread, but my
comments only apply to this post.
> already looked at ongoing work), in a peer to peer manner. The goal
> is to achive `nearly complete fault tolerence' by replicating data.
A worthy goal indeed!
> - Postmasters are running on
Hello,
Does it mean that psql uses cursors ?
regards
Haris Peco
On Friday 11 October 2002 05:58 pm, Dave Cramer wrote:
> This really is an artifact of the way that postgres gives us the data.
>
> When you query the backend you get *all* of the results in the query,
> and there is no indication
Currently there is a TODO list item to have move 0 not position to the
end of the cursor.
Moving to the end of the cursor is useful, can we keep the behaviour and
change it to move end, or just leave it the way it is?
Dave
---(end of broadcast)-
[ pgsql-patches removed from Cc: list ]
Anuradha Ratnaweera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am trying to add some replication features to postgres (yes, I have
> already looked at ongoing work), in a peer to peer manner.
Did you look at the research behind Postgres-R, and the pgreplication
stuff
Rod Taylor wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 09:20, Antti Haapala wrote:
> >
> > Check out:
> >
> > http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/MySQL-PostgreSQL_features.html
> >
> > MySQL AB compares MySQL with PostgreSQL.
>
> I wouldn't look too far into these at all. I've tried to get
> ' " as identifier q
Well, not scalable doesn't have to mean "not good". That's why I
asked. Considering this is one of the problems with mosix clusters
(process migration and associated restrictions) and the nature of
PostgreSQL's implementation I'm not sure what other result may of been
expected. Because of that,
On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 08:20, Antti Haapala wrote:
> Quoted from one page
> > Because we couldn't get vacuum() to work reliable with PostgreSQL 7.1.1,
I have little respect for the MySQL advocacy guys. They purposely
spread misinformation. They always compare their leading edge alpha
software ag
On 11 Oct 2002 at 8:30, Greg Copeland wrote:
> I'd be curious to hear in a little more detail what constitutes "not
> good" for postgres on a mosix cluster.
> On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 06:15, Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 04:29:53PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> > Have
On 11 Oct 2002 at 16:20, Antti Haapala wrote:
> Check out:
> http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/MySQL-PostgreSQL_features.html
Well, I guess there are many threads on this. You can dig around archives..
> > Upgrading MySQL Server is painless. When you are upgrading MySQL Server,
> > you don't need to
On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 09:20, Antti Haapala wrote:
>
> Check out:
>
> http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/MySQL-PostgreSQL_features.html
>
> MySQL AB compares MySQL with PostgreSQL.
I wouldn't look too far into these at all. I've tried to get
' " as identifier quote (ANSI SQL) ' corrected on the cras
Am Freitag, 11. Oktober 2002 14:12 schrieb Tom Lane:
> Mario Weilguni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Is it possible to get rid of the "t_natts" fields in the tuple header?
> > Is this field only for "alter table add/drop" support?
>
> "Only"? A lot of people consider that pretty important ...
W
I'd be curious to hear in a little more detail what constitutes "not
good" for postgres on a mosix cluster.
Greg
On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 06:15, Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 04:29:53PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> >
> > Well, I don't think adding support for multiple
On 11 Oct 2002 at 16:16, Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am trying to add some replication features to postgres (yes, I have
> already looked at ongoing work), in a peer to peer manner. The goal
> is to achive `nearly complete fault tolerence' by replicating data.
Sounds a lot li
Check out:
http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/MySQL-PostgreSQL_features.html
MySQL AB compares MySQL with PostgreSQL.
Quoted from one page
> Because we couldn't get vacuum() to work reliable with PostgreSQL 7.1.1,
> we haven't been able to generate a --fast version of the benchmarks yet
> (where we
Mario Weilguni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is it possible to get rid of the "t_natts" fields in the tuple header?
> Is this field only for "alter table add/drop" support?
"Only"? A lot of people consider that pretty important ...
But removing 2 bytes isn't going to save anything, on most machi
Barry,
Never mind.
Patch with 'begin;set autocommit to on;commit' work fine for JDBC spec.
regards,
Haris Peco
On Friday 11 October 2002 02:57 am, Barry Lind wrote:
> Did anything come of this discussion on whether SET initiates a
> transaction or not?
>
> In summary what is the right way to deal
Hi all,
I am trying to add some replication features to postgres (yes, I have
already looked at ongoing work), in a peer to peer manner. The goal
is to achive `nearly complete fault tolerence' by replicating data.
The basic framework I have in mind is somewhat like this.
- Postmasters are runn
Barry,
Is it true ?
I create table with one column varchar(500) and enter 1 milion rows with
length 10-20 character.JDBC query 'select * from a' get error 'out of
memory', but psql not.
I insert 8 milion rows and psql work fine yet (slow, but work)
In C library is 'execute query' without fetch
On 11 Oct 2002 at 16:29, Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 03:54:15PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> I will look at it, too. Thanks for the link. In some cases, starting
> anew is faster than learning unmaintained existing code.
While that's true, usogres code is just fe
On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 03:54:15PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
>
> On 11 Oct 2002 at 16:16, Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote:
>
> > I am trying to add some replication features to postgres (yes, I have
> > already looked at ongoing work), in a peer to peer manner. The goal
> > is to achive `nearly
On 11 Oct 2002 at 16:39, Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 04:04:29PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> > On 11 Oct 2002 at 16:29, Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 03:54:15PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> > > I will look at it, too. Thanks f
On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 04:29:53PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
>
> Well, I don't think adding support for multiple slaves to usogres would be that
> problematic. Of course if you want to load balance your application queries,
> application has to be aware of that. I will not do sending req
On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 04:04:29PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> On 11 Oct 2002 at 16:29, Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 03:54:15PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> > I will look at it, too. Thanks for the link. In some cases, starting
> > anew is faster than l
33 matches
Mail list logo
