Re: [GENERAL] Wish: remove ancient constructs from Postgres

2006-02-27 Thread Karsten Hilbert
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 12:25:57AM +0300, Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote: > > Please help. > how? ... > PostgreSQL has very-very good documentation, but it teaches to > go Pg's way, which is not right in that sense, unfortunately... By supplying documentation patches, perhaps ? Karsten -- GPG key ID

Re: [GENERAL] Wish: remove ancient constructs from Postgres

2006-02-27 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Am Sonntag, 26. Februar 2006 21:24 schrieb Neil Conway: > I think a better approach would be to introduce the concept of "SQL > dialects", similar to "--std=..." in GCC or SQL modes in MySQL 5. That > would help people who want to write standard-compliant applications > while not inconveniencing th

Re: [GENERAL] Which indexes does a query use?

2006-02-27 Thread John D. Burger
Chris Velevitch wrote: Are you saying that the strategy pg uses is dynamic, in that as the size of the table grows the strategy changes? The planner is quite dynamic, and what strategy it comes up with will depend not just on the size of the table, but other things as well, even on the parti

Re: [GENERAL] majordomo unmaintained, postmaster emails ignored?

2006-02-27 Thread Roman Neuhauser
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2006-02-26 19:01:58 -0400: > 'k, I just checked all the lists you listed, and you are subscribed to > each of them ... are you not receiving messages? I'm not receiving messages because I'm subscribed with nomail. That's not the problem however. I want to receive the

Re: [GENERAL] Operator for int8 array

2006-02-27 Thread Tom Lane
"S.Thanga Prakash" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > We are already in the process of migrating toward 8.1 . > For existing support, we like to support with 7.1.3 . No, just stop right there; your reasonable-sounding premise is utterly not reasonable. You should be making every possible effort

Re: [GENERAL] Wish: remove ancient constructs from Postgres

2006-02-27 Thread Nikolay Samokhvalov
On 2/27/06, Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Am Sonntag, 26. Februar 2006 21:24 schrieb Neil Conway: > > I think a better approach would be to introduce the concept of "SQL > > dialects", similar to "--std=..." in GCC or SQL modes in MySQL 5. That > > would help people who want to writ

Re: [GENERAL] Wish: remove ancient constructs from Postgres

2006-02-27 Thread Nikolay Samokhvalov
On 2/27/06, Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The alternatives to distinct on are painful. They are generally both harder > to read and run slower. > 'DISTINCT ON' is evil constuction, because (w/o any 'ORDER BY') it produses unpredictable result, as 'ORDER BY random()' does. When newb

Re: [GENERAL] Wish: remove ancient constructs from Postgres

2006-02-27 Thread Stephan Szabo
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote: > On 2/27/06, Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The alternatives to distinct on are painful. They are generally both harder > to read and run slower. > >'DISTINCT ON' is evil constuction, because (w/o any 'ORDER BY') it >produses unpredi

Re: [GENERAL] Wish: remove ancient constructs from Postgres

2006-02-27 Thread Nikolay Samokhvalov
On 2/27/06, Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote: > > > On 2/27/06, Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The alternatives to distinct on are painful. They are generally both harder > > to read and run slower. > > > > >'DISTINCT ON' is

Re: [GENERAL] Wish: remove ancient constructs from Postgres

2006-02-27 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 06:26:02PM +0300, Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote: > On 2/27/06, Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Such a thing has been discussed from time to time but in reality you > > wouldn't > > get useful results from it because just about any application will violate > > th

Re: [GENERAL] Wish: remove ancient constructs from Postgres

2006-02-27 Thread Nikolay Samokhvalov
On 2/27/06, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > Huh? We should ofcourse try to implement SQL:2003 wherever we can, but > to say this means we need to throw out anything not mentioned is silly. > For example, CREATE INDEX is not in SQL:2003, are you seriously > suggesting we remove it? i didn't suggest

Re: [GENERAL] Wish: remove ancient constructs from Postgres

2006-02-27 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 06:59:21PM +0300, Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote: > On 2/27/06, Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >'DISTINCT ON' is evil constuction, because (w/o any 'ORDER BY') it > > >produses unpredictable result, as 'ORDER BY random()' does. > > > > And so does UNION in the stand

Re: [GENERAL] ltree + gist index performance degrades significantly over a night

2006-02-27 Thread CG
Tsearch2 searches for whole words, and is designed with language in mind, yes? I'm looking for consecutive characters in words or serial numbers, etc. As for support, the same guys who wrote Tsearch2 wrote ltree. Can't go wrong there! Here's the solution to this problem: As usual, operator err

[GENERAL] problem with windows xp sp2 and postgres-8.1.3

2006-02-27 Thread Istvan Nagy
Hello Guys,   first of all, great effort from you this tool.   Problem exists with following config: - Windows XP Pro, SP2 (English). - PostgreSQL-8.1.3 - lot of development programs, and IDE-s (for the clients i am working unfortunately they are windoz-based :-(...).   Same problem occurs as

Re: [GENERAL] Wish: remove ancient constructs from Postgres

2006-02-27 Thread Stephan Szabo
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote: >it's completely different thing. look at the spec and you'll >understand the difference. in two words, with 'DISTINCT ON' we lose >some values (from some columns), when UNION not (it just removes >duplicates, comparing _entire_ rows). No it's not,

Re: [GENERAL] ltree + gist index performance degrades significantly over a night

2006-02-27 Thread Bernhard Weisshuhn
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 09:14:40AM -0800, CG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I could probably get even better performance out of the table, at the cost of > a > significant increase in table and index size, by chopping up the columns into > smaller chunks. > > "Hello World" would yield > > 'h.e.l.

Re: [GENERAL] A question about Vacuum analyze

2006-02-27 Thread Emi Lu
Thank you very much for all your inputs. I believe "analyze" is the one I should use . Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Emi Lu): no. the suggestion was that a VACUUM is not needed, but that an ANALYZE might be. Thank you gnari for your answer. But I am a bit confused about not running vacuu

Re: [GENERAL] ltree + gist index performance degrades significantly over a night

2006-02-27 Thread CG
That would do the job, wouldn't it? :) I don't think it's a naive question at all. Its quite a good question, and the solution you suggest is a good option to have, and would probably work better than the single-vector ltree index for simple substring matching. In my case, the ltree+gist index ta

Re: [GENERAL] Wish: remove ancient constructs from Postgres

2006-02-27 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 18:34:16 +0300, Nikolay Samokhvalov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2/27/06, Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The alternatives to distinct on are painful. They are generally both harder > > to read and run slower. > > > > 'DISTINCT ON' is evil constuction, b

[GENERAL] Breaking Path/Polygon Data into Pieces

2006-02-27 Thread Volkan YAZICI
Hi, 2 weeks ago, a user in -tr-genel asked for a function to break path/polygon type data into pieces. He also told that, it creates a bottleneck in the network traffic when they try to receive rows with polygon data of thousands of nodes, while it's enough for them to have polygons partially. AF

Re: [GENERAL] ltree + gist index performance degrades significantly over a night

2006-02-27 Thread Bernhard Weisshuhn
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 10:27:20AM -0800, CG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] I'd need to see if the space required for the varchar+btree tables are > comparible, better, or worse than the ltree+gist tables with regards to size. Please test this, I'm guessing (hoping actually) that having bazil

Re: [GENERAL] Question about COPY to/from

2006-02-27 Thread Emi Lu
Hi Stephen, We have millions of record and would like to insert into a table. I remebered people mentioned that "COPY" is the most effecient way to insert data, right? If not, which is it, pg_restore? By the way, does it have to be superuser to run copy to and from? COPY is what you w

Re: [GENERAL] majordomo unmaintained, postmaster emails ignored?

2006-02-27 Thread Marc G. Fournier
Can you try something more recent then "last year"? On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, Roman Neuhauser wrote: # [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2006-02-26 19:01:58 -0400: 'k, I just checked all the lists you listed, and you are subscribed to each of them ... are you not receiving messages? I'm not receiving messa

Re: [GENERAL] Question about COPY to/from

2006-02-27 Thread Tom Lane
Emi Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > However, running "psql -d db -h ... from STDID", I believe we are > forced to type the password through prompt command line. Since our data > population task is through cronjob, is there a way, we can run "COPY ... > STDIN" by explicitly specifying passwor

Re: [GENERAL] Breaking Path/Polygon Data into Pieces

2006-02-27 Thread Michael Fuhr
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 08:41:52PM +0200, Volkan YAZICI wrote: > 2 weeks ago, a user in -tr-genel asked for a function to break > path/polygon type data into pieces. He also told that, it creates a > bottleneck in the network traffic when they try to receive rows with > polygon data of thousands of

[GENERAL] audit tables adding columns

2006-02-27 Thread Jebus
I am using triggers and table inheritance for my audit tables. Here is the function I am using its straight copy from the docs. CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION process_reward_audit() RETURNS "trigger" AS $BODY$ BEGIN IF (TG_OP = 'INSERT') THEN INSERT IN

Re: [GENERAL] Wish: remove ancient constructs from Postgres

2006-02-27 Thread Christopher Weimann
On 02/26/2006-10:36AM, Andrus Moor wrote: > > It is difficult to write standard-compliant code in Postgres. > There are a lot of constructs which have SQL equivalents but are still used > widely, even in samples in docs! > > For example, there are suggestions using > > now()::CHAR!=foo > > whil

[GENERAL] In case nobody has seen this survey from Sun ...

2006-02-27 Thread Marc G. Fournier
Just got posted to the FreeBSD list ... has several questions that revolve around the BSD vs GPL licensing, and somewhere that 'omit' PostgreSQL as an OS option (while others include it) ... http://enews.sun.com/CTServlet?id=103018442-968290480:1141071714252 Marc G. Fournier

[GENERAL] Dumping functions

2006-02-27 Thread Steve Crawford
How can I dump a function definition with pg_dump? Background: We often need to create objects that are all relevant to only a specific project. Sometimes it is a single table. Other times there are many tables, indexes, views, rules, triggers and functions. All the objects share a unique subs

Re: [GENERAL] postgresql documentation

2006-02-27 Thread Kris Jurka
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006, Randy Yates wrote: I've noticed that the PDF version of the manuals for 8.0 and 8.1 are lacking bookmarks and/or TOC and document reference links. If this is generated via LaTeX, such links oculd easily be incorporated via the hyperref package. It would make the document m

Re: [GENERAL] Wish: remove ancient constructs from Postgres

2006-02-27 Thread Jonathan Gardner
> Aren't you afraid of that in the future these people will switch to MySQL because of ability to work in standard way?.. You're joking, right? At least I had a good laugh. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please s

[GENERAL] How many postmasters should be running?

2006-02-27 Thread Stock, Stuart
Hello, A few minutes ago, we were surprised to find a second postmaster process running on our database machine as a child of the original postmaster. The child postmaster was around for about a minute then disappeared. This is a Opteron machine running RedHat AS4 with Postgres 8.1.2. Does the po

Re: [GENERAL] postgresql documentation

2006-02-27 Thread Randy Yates
Kris Jurka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, 26 Feb 2006, Randy Yates wrote: > >> I've noticed that the PDF version of the manuals for 8.0 and 8.1 >> are lacking bookmarks and/or TOC and document reference links. If >> this is generated via LaTeX, such links oculd easily be incorporated >> via

Re: [GENERAL] How many postmasters should be running?

2006-02-27 Thread Michael Fuhr
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 09:05:51PM -0500, Stock, Stuart wrote: > A few minutes ago, we were surprised to find a second postmaster process > running on our database machine as a child of the original postmaster. The > child postmaster was around for about a minute then disappeared. This is a > Opter

Re: [GENERAL] rotate records

2006-02-27 Thread Natasha Galkina
Michael, Thank you very much for your response. I tried your solutions but still it looks like it doesn't work when I delete random records. select * from foo; id | val +- 1 | 13 2 | 14 3 | 15 (3 rows) delete from foo where val = '13'; DELETE 1 delete from foo where val = '15';

Re: [GENERAL] rotate records

2006-02-27 Thread Jeevanandam, Kathirvel (IE10)
Hi all, I am facing performance issues even with less than 3000 records, I am using Triggers/SPs in all the tables. What could be the problem. Any idea it is good to use triggers w.r.t performance? Regards, Jeeva.K ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: H

Re: [GENERAL] rotate records

2006-02-27 Thread Michael Fuhr
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 07:39:22PM -0800, Natasha Galkina wrote: > I tried your solutions but still it looks like it doesn't work when I > delete random records. [...] > As you can see the record with value '14' is gone without explicit > delete, which is not what I expected. Do you have any ideas

Re: [GENERAL] rotate records

2006-02-27 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 09:14:59 +0530, "Jeevanandam, Kathirvel (IE10)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, Please don't hijack existing threads to start new ones. This can cause people to miss your question and messes up the archives. Performance questions should generally be posted to the pe

triggers, performance Was: Re: [GENERAL] rotate records

2006-02-27 Thread Tino Wildenhain
Jeevanandam, Kathirvel (IE10) schrieb: > Hi all, > > I am facing performance issues even with less than 3000 records, I am > using Triggers/SPs in all the tables. What could be the problem. > Any idea it is good to use triggers w.r.t performance? Much to general. What triggers? (what are they doi

Re: [GENERAL] How many postmasters should be running?

2006-02-27 Thread Tom Lane
Michael Fuhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 09:05:51PM -0500, Stock, Stuart wrote: >> A few minutes ago, we were surprised to find a second postmaster process >> running on our database machine as a child of the original postmaster. > Each connection causes the postmaster to