Hi,
Is this all that's planned for 7.5? (based on current TODO list)
-Change factorial to return a numeric (Gavin)
-COMMENT ON [ CAST | CONVERSION | OPERATOR CLASS | LARGE OBJECT | LANGUAGE ]
(Christopher)
-Have psql \dn show only visible temp schemas using current_schemas()
-Have psql '\i ~/' ac
--- Thomas Hallgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The JVM will be started on-demand.
> Although I realize that one JVM per connection will consume a fair amount of
> resources, I still think it is the best solution. The description of this
> system must of course make it very clear that this is wha
--- Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > If I understand correctly, a table that has 4B+ rows cannot be restored
> after
> > the dump and that, in turn, may/will affect the ability to upgrade to new
> > versions of pgSql.
>
--- Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Wouldn't the above put a limit on a number of records one could have
> > in table?
>
> No.
If I understand correctly, a table that has 4B+ rows cannot be restored after
the dump and that, in turn, may/will affect the ability to upgrade to new
versions
> --- Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually you can only have 4 billion SQL commands per xid, because the
> CommandId datatype is also just 32 bits. I've never heard of anyone
> running into that limit, though.
>
Wouldn't the above put a limit on a number of records one could have in ta
pg 7.4.0
Hi,
>From the server log:
Nov 28 16:31:02 srv postgres[2484]: [1076-7] ^I-- Disable triggers
Nov 28 16:31:02 srv postgres[2484]: [1076-8] ^IUPDATE pg_catalog.pg_class SET
reltriggers = 0 WHERE oid = 'test'::pg_catalog.regclass;
If table with the name "test" exists in several schemas, wo
--- Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In what scenarios? I'd easily buy this if you are talking about small
> tables.
>
Read the message again.
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/
--- Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2003 at 12:40:28AM +0100, Andreas Pflug wrote:
>
> > A common mistake, can't count how often I created this one... And not
> > easy to find, because EXPLAIN won't explain triggers.
>
> That's a pity. And the lack of EXPLAINing func
--- Andreas Pflug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stephan Szabo wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >IIRC, he was. I think the thing causing the difference between his times
> >and the ones we saw typically when doing the tests was that he didn't have
> >an index on the fktable's referencing column.
> >
> >
>
> A
--- Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Quite honestly, I think they should check their foreign keys.
Generally speaking, I agree. The problem is that verification of FK
constraint(s) may take too long, depending on the size of the db and other
conditions. In my case, on test data, it takes abo
--- Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This doesn't really replace pg_dump/pg_restore, because it probably
> > wouldn't be able to upgrade a cluster.
>
> Right, any such physical dump would be limited to restoring a whole
> cluster as-is: no imports into other clusters, no selectivity, no f
--- Andreas Pflug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, I mentioned it just a few days when discussing dependency in pg_dump.
> This is somewhat complementary to WAL and PITR. I'm seeking for a fast
> way to dump and restore a complete database, like physical file copy,
> without shutting down the b
--- ow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IMHO, not only data need to loaded before FK constraints are created but also
> there has got to be a feature to allow creation of an FK constraint WITHOUT
> doing the verification that all loaded/existing records satisfy the FK
> constrai
--- Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FK, primary, and unique constraints are already split out from the
> CREATE TABLE for performance reasons. We could think about folding them
> back in in a schema-only dump, but in a full dump I don't think it's
> negotiable --- you really want to load the
--- Dann Corbit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have all of the above database systems installed on the Windows 2000
> machine I am typing this message from.
> DB/2 7.1
> Oracle 8.1.7 and 9.2.0.5
> MySQL 4.0.12
> Sybase Adaptive Server 12.0
> Informix Dynamic Server 9.2
> (Also SapDB, Firebird serv
--- Rocco Altier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, ow wrote:
>
> > Have *never* seen ppl running Oracle or Sybase on Windows.
>
> I can't speak for Oracle, but Sybase on Windows is definitely a real
> thing. If you have to deal with develo
--- Dann Corbit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Which feature is requested more than that?
Not sure how often features are requested and by whom. However, if you take a
look at the TODO list, you'll find plenty of stuff more important than win32
port.
> Of the following (which includes every signifi
--- Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't call porting Postgres to run well on something like 40% of the
> world's servers (or whatever it is) "just another port".
Statistics is a tricky thing. IMHO, there are plenty of things that are much
more important than win32 por
> > http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira/pricing.jsp
Another option is free open source Scarab, http://scarab.tigris.org Actually,
I'd prefer it.
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsne
--- Dann Corbit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why couldn't you just release the win32 version of 7.4
> when it was finished.
I agree. Don't delay *nix release because of win32 port is not ready. To many
users win32 port is of marginal importance anyway.
__
Do
RH7.3 is a supported distribution for at least 6 months. Any plans to add
Postgres 7.3.3 RPMs for RH7.3?
Thanks
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com
---(end of broa
> select * from table where field ILIKE 'blAH'; -- ;-)
> is almost as easy :-)
> PS: no, don't do this if you want portability. I think the charset
> idea's a better one.
>
> Ron
select * from table where lower(field)=lower('BLah') will break
portability too in the sense that many DBs (perhaps
There's "The Open Source Database Benchmark",
http://osdb.sourceforge.net/.
Anyone tried to use it?
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Send Flowers for Valentine's Day
http://shopping.yahoo.com
---(end of broadcast)
IMHO, replication, performance improvements, cross-db queries, etc is
much better use of time than Windows port.
--- Dann Corbit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For MySQL:
> There is no Cygwin needed. Period.
>
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - P
Cross-db queries.
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.po
25 matches
Mail list logo
