Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 2005-05-09 at 15:18 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... usually. We will promote later arrivals in front of older ones if
>> the alternative would be a deadlock (eg, the later one already holds
>> some lock that would block the earlier one).
> Thats par
On Mon, 2005-05-09 at 15:18 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Mon, 2005-05-09 at 12:21 -0500, Kris Kiger wrote:
> >> Quick question. I lock a table, call it table X, and then issue two
> >> updates on that table. The two updates are left waiting. I then unl
On Mon, 2005-05-09 at 14:10, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Your original release was 7.3.3 and you have just moved to 7.3.9.
>
> Did he move to 7.3.9? I got the impression he'd only applied the
> recommended catalog change to his existing installation. But if he
>
I put together a little Perl script (which assumes proper installation
of both DBI and DBD::Pg and that template1 exists) that takes care of
the character conversion vulnerability:
http://www.sitening.com/postgresql-update-2005-1
I've run this on my development servers, and it seems to have had
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 2005-05-09 at 12:21 -0500, Kris Kiger wrote:
>> Quick question. I lock a table, call it table X, and then issue two
>> updates on that table. The two updates are left waiting. I then unlock
>> the table. The two updates go through. My questi
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Your original release was 7.3.3 and you have just moved to 7.3.9.
Did he move to 7.3.9? I got the impression he'd only applied the
recommended catalog change to his existing installation. But if he
did, then you're right, it's more than likely got someth
On Mon, 2005-05-09 at 12:21 -0500, Kris Kiger wrote:
> Quick question. I lock a table, call it table X, and then issue two
> updates on that table. The two updates are left waiting. I then unlock
> the table. The two updates go through. My question is, is there a
> predictable way to deter
On Mon, 2005-05-09 at 09:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Sz=FBcs_G=E1bor?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > According to user reports, the production server slowed down noticeably on
> > Friday and is almost unbearably slow today (Monday). My humble question is,
> > could you think of a
Quick question. I lock a table, call it table X, and then issue two
updates on that table. The two updates are left waiting. I then unlock
the table. The two updates go through. My question is, is there a
predictable way to determine which query will be executed first? Thanks
in advance
David F. Skoll wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Connect in standalone mode?
Does not work. Tom Lane replied with the only thing that does work,
which we independently discovered about 30 seconds before hearing from
Tom. :-)
The solution is to modify the PostgreSQL source code to skip the chec
=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Sz=FBcs_G=E1bor?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> According to user reports, the production server slowed down noticeably on
> Friday and is almost unbearably slow today (Monday). My humble question is,
> could you think of any way this patch could affect overall speed, or is it
> j
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ian FREISLICH wrote:
| Enrico Weigelt wrote:
|
|>* Mohan, Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|>
|>
|>
|>>This reminds me of a long and very satisfying thread on another
|>>db listserv, where some flailing newbie kept writing:
|>>
|>>
|>>HELP
|>>
|>>
|>>to
Dear Gurus,
I dunno if it should go to -perform or -bugs, so stay with the original message.
As Tom wrote in
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-announce/2005-05/msg1.php as well
as at http://www.postgresql.org/about/news.315, I patched all our testing
(7.4.6) and production databases (7.3.
i know what the trigger does, i writed it :)
i dont have a problem , i already fixed the function to work nice and smooth
i just sent it for fun, anyway no problem about the subject
[Please use a descriptive subject -- "thats funny :)" conveys no
information about the problem, and it resembles subj
[Please use a descriptive subject -- "thats funny :)" conveys no
information about the problem, and it resembles subjects seen on
some viruses.]
On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 02:06:46PM +0300, Vasilis Ventirozos wrote:
>
> hi all i created a function that restarts the server, i will show you
> what i a
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * Mohan, Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > This reminds me of a long and very satisfying thread on another
> > db listserv, where some flailing newbie kept writing:
> >
> >
> > HELP
> >
> >
> > to the list, thinking he was getting the admin functionality. :)
>
hi all i created a function that restarts the server, i will show you
what i am doing
drop trigger lala_trig on favorites;
drop function fav_funct() cascade;
create or replace function fav_funct() returns trigger AS '
declare
old_id int default 0;
new_id int default 0;
rec record;
rec2 record;
re
17 matches
Mail list logo
