Hi,
Does PostgreSQL can run on Windows x64?
If yes, which version?
Thanks,
G
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
Hi,
I've got some code which postgres 8.3.3 won't accept. Postgres
doesn't like the INTO clause on RETURNING INTO and I've tried
following the documentation.
UPDATE "EntityRelation" SET "Status" = inStatus, "Modified" =
Session_TimeStamp(), "ModifiedBy" = UserID() WHERE ("RelationID" =
inRelation
Dale wrote:
Hi,
I've got some code which postgres 8.3.3 won't accept. Postgres
doesn't like the INTO clause on RETURNING INTO and I've tried
following the documentation.
UPDATE "EntityRelation" SET "Status" = inStatus, "Modified" =
Session_TimeStamp(), "ModifiedBy" = UserID() WHERE ("RelationID
On Aug 18, 9:23 pm, Lew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dale wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I've got some code which postgres 8.3.3 won't accept. Postgres
> > doesn't like the INTO clause on RETURNING INTO and I've tried
> > following the documentation.
>
> > UPDATE "EntityRelation" SET "Status" = inStatus, "Mod
Hi,everybody!
I wish to have a function with code above, but compiller generate
syntactic error at the line "SET SESSION ROLE wishedrole;".
How to pass the wishedrole value to the structure?
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION f_switch_role(INOUT text,INOUT boolean) AS
$BODY$
DECLARE
wishedrole ALIA
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 11:42 PM, Amber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear all:
>We are currently considering using PostgreSQL to host a read only
> warehouse, we would like to get some experiences, best practices and
> performance metrics from the user community, following is the question lis
I have a db (tables with up to 5,000,000 records, up to 70 columns x 1,500,000
records, around 50Gb of disk space for the database (incl data, indexes, etc)
Most records have PostGIS geometry columns, which work very well.
For read performance this is on a (2 yr old) Linux box with 2x software
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 9:59 PM, Kim Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Great thanks all.
> Can you give me any indication of the performance implications of
> setting pooling=false?
>
Yeap. All the time you would need to connect to postgresql you will
have the overhead of tcp connection establ
Great thanks all.
Can you give me any indication of the performance implications of
setting pooling=false?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Francisco
Figueiredo Jr.
Sent: Tuesday, 19 August 2008 3:48 AM
To: Magnus Hagander
Cc: Kim Robinson;
On Mon, 2008-08-18 at 11:01 -0400, justin wrote:
> Ow Mun Heng wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Scott Marlowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > > If you're looking at read only / read
> > > mostly, then RAID5 or 6 might be a better choice than RAID-10. But
> > > RAID 10 is my default
http://www.mail-archive.com/pgsql-general@postgresql.org/msg111788.htmlprobably
won't match an index, because ASC or DESC ordering depends NOT on
the table's data, but on the function parameter.
Unfortunately the planner does not recognize the following case:
CREATE TABLE "public"."prime" (
"nu
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 3:01 PM, Ivan Sergio Borgonovo
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> this:
>
> begin;
> explain select * from catalog_items limit 5;
> commit;
>
> return this:
>
> -- Executing query:
> begin;
> explain select * from catalog_items limit 5;
> commit;
> Query result with 2 rows discard
this:
begin;
explain select * from catalog_items limit 5;
commit;
return this:
-- Executing query:
begin;
explain select * from catalog_items limit 5;
commit;
Query result with 2 rows discarded.
Query returned successfully with no result in 58 ms.
I'm interested in explain inside a transactio
On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 15:16:01 -0400
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'm not sure what's really happening but why apparently the
> > delete statements get executed before the 2 inserts even if
> > constraints are deferred?
>
> You didn't m
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not sure what's really happening but why apparently the delete
> statements get executed before the 2 inserts even if constraints are
> deferred?
You didn't mark the FK constraints as deferrable --- I'm pretty sure
the default is NOT DEFERRAB
I've something like
create table p (
pid int primary key
-- other stuff
);
create table s1 (
s1id int primary key,
pid int references p (pid) on delete cascade
-- other stuff
);
begin;
set constraints all deferred;
delete from p;
-- insert into p (pid) select * atable;
-- insert into
All,
>From a performance standpoint what is the downside to using a UUID column?
>Our current database with 25 locations after 5 years is only about 2.5 gig.
>We do about 200,000 orders per year so we are not getting hit with a huge
>amount
of data. Much of our data is static or onc
On 8/18/08, Magnus Hagander
Hi, all!
As Magnus said, this is caused by the fact Npgsql does connection pool
by default.
You can change that by passing pooling=false in your connection string.
You can get more info at
manual.npgsql.org
I hope it helps
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Kim Robinson w
=?us-ascii?Q?Tom=20Tom?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Attached is a pg_restore.exe off CVS tip today, which should include the
>> patch. Please try this one.
> I tested the restore using the provided pg_restore.exe. The output is:
> pg_restore: [archiver (db)] could not
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 4:09 AM, Joao Ferreira gmail
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What risks are we facing if we choose not to update postgresql ?
A _lot_ more risk than updating.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://w
Ow Mun Heng wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Scott Marlowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
If you throw enough drives on a quality RAID controller at it you can
get very good throughput. If you're looking at read only / read
mostly, then RAID5 or 6 might be a better choice than RAID-10. But
RAID
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 03:53:32AM -0700, Alexi Gen wrote:
> Is there a table/view available from where I can check what time the cluster
> was started?
> Need this to calculate the uptime of the cluster.
In PostgreSQL 8.1 and later you can run these queries to get the start
time and uptime:
SEL
On Fri, 2008-08-15 at 16:37 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Reid Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Would plpgsql.so get built with..
>
> > ./configure --prefix=/usr/local/pgsql833 --without-readline --disable-shared
>
>
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 3:09 AM, Joao Ferreira gmail
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What risks are we facing if we choose not to update postgresql ?
http://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning
--
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
Visit the Los Angeles PostgreSQL Users Group (LAPUG)
http://pugs.post
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 9:35 PM, William Garrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Is there an easy way to write one single query that can alternate between
> ASC and DESC orders? Ex:
>
>
Take a look at this link
http://www.mail-archive.com/pgsql-general@postgresql.org/msg111788.html
--
Regards,
Ser
Hello,
Is there a table/view available from where I can check what time the cluster
was started?
Need this to calculate the uptime of the cluster.
Or is there something else that I need to do in order to calculate this?
Any help on this is appreciated.
Cheers!
Alexi
Send instant messages to y
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > I wrote:
> >> Of course the larger issue is why it's failing --- 150MB doesn't seem
> >> like that much for a modern machine. I suspect that PQerrorMessage()
> >> would tell us something useful, but pg_restore isn't letting us see it.
> >
> > I've appl
Hello all,
a few days ago I bumped into this:
-
# vacuumdb -f -z -a
vacuumdb: vacuuming database "postgres"
VACUUM
vacuumdb: vacuuming database "rtdata"
vacuumdb: vacuuming of database "rtdata" failed: ERROR: failed to
re-find parent key in "timeslots_s
-Original Message-
From: Scott Marlowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>If you throw enough drives on a quality RAID controller at it you can
>get very good throughput. If you're looking at read only / read
>mostly, then RAID5 or 6 might be a better choice than RAID-10. But
>RAID 10 is my default cho
On 2008-08-14 20:03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'd like to ask you about some experience in managing huge databases which
> store mostly binary files.
Do you mean BYTEA or large objects? Both have pros and cons.
> We're developing a system which is likely to grow up to terabytes in
> some years
Kim Robinson wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I am using the npgsql postgres data adaptor in a C# ASP.NET application.
> Each time the site establishes a new connection to the database a
> postgres.exe process is started. For some reason this process is not
> removed when the connection is closed.
>
> Any
31 matches
Mail list logo
