El Sábado 07 Julio 2001 16:36, Lamar Owen escribió:
> On Thursday 05 July 2001 10:51, Víctor Romero wrote:
> > I am running postgresql 7.1 on a SMP Linux box. It runs, but it never
> > pass a loadavg of 0.4, no matter how I try to overload the system.
> >
> > The same configuration, the same exe
At 11:44 PM 7/7/2001 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>Matthew Hagerty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > So then how would I code for the exception, i.e. the backend goes down
> just
> > before or during my call to PQsendQuery()? If I am non-blocking then I
> can
> > determine that my query did not go (PQs
I suppose few people have remembered that today is what could be
considered the 5th anniversary of the PostgreSQL project. Cheers for
another five years!
http://www.ca.postgresql.org/mhonarc/pgsql-hackers/1999-10/msg00552.html
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://funkturm.homeip.n
> I suppose few people have remembered that today is what could be
> considered the 5th anniversary of the PostgreSQL project. Cheers for
> another five years!
>
>
> http://www.ca.postgresql.org/mhonarc/pgsql-hackers/1999-10/msg00552.html
Good catch! Yes, you are right.
--
Bruce Momjian
When adding unique keys:
* If you do this, you get two unique keys (7.0.3):
create table test (int4 a, int4 b);
create unique index indx1 on test(a, b);
create unique index indx2 on test(a, b);
Then you get this:
Table "test"
Attribute | Type | Modifier
---+-+
> That might happen eventually, but I'm not all that eager to convert
> the postmaster into a (half-baked) substitute for cron. My experience
> as a dbadmin is that you need various sorts of routinely-run maintenance
> tasks anyway; VACUUM is only one of them. So you're gonna need some
> cron ta
> You'll still need to VACUUM to get rid of the obsoleted versions of the
> row. The point of the planned 7.2 changes is to make VACUUM cheap and
> nonintrusive enough so that you can run it frequently on tables that are
> seeing continual updates.
If it becomes non-intrusive, then why not have
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If it becomes non-intrusive, then why not have PostgreSQL run VACUUM
> automatically
That might happen eventually, but I'm not all that eager to convert
the postmaster into a (half-baked) substitute for cron. My experience
as a dbadmin is t
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ps. I know I only tested these on 7.0.3 - but I assume HEAD has similar
> behaviour?
You assume wrong.
It's a bad idea to try to develop backend code against back releases.
regards, tom lane
---
> You assume wrong.
>
> It's a bad idea to try to develop backend code against back releases.
My bad. I'm at work at the moment and I tried it out here to rejig my
memory before posting. I do remember testing it on HEAD at home and the
create table (.., unique, unique) doesn't duplicate.
Don't
10 matches
Mail list logo
