On 2022-08-07 7:54 AM, Ron wrote:
On 8/7/22 00:30, Frank Millman wrote:
Hi all
Apologies if this is an FAQ, but I could not find the answer I was
looking for.
I want to run two SELECTs, one immediately after the other.
I want to ensure that no other process updates the database in
betwee
On 8/7/22 00:30, Frank Millman wrote:
Hi all
Apologies if this is an FAQ, but I could not find the answer I was looking
for.
I want to run two SELECTs, one immediately after the other.
I want to ensure that no other process updates the database in between the
two.
What is the best way to
Hi all
Apologies if this is an FAQ, but I could not find the answer I was
looking for.
I want to run two SELECTs, one immediately after the other.
I want to ensure that no other process updates the database in between
the two.
What is the best way to achieve this?
Thanks
Frank Millman
On 8/6/22 15:45, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
On 2022-08-06 15:06:06 -0500, Ron wrote:
On 8/6/22 03:40, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
Using sync replication on an unstable link is probably not a good idea.
Every time the link goes down, A freezes. Is this what you want?
I had to fight my end users about ho
On 2022-08-06 15:06:06 -0500, Ron wrote:
> On 8/6/22 03:40, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> > Using sync replication on an unstable link is probably not a good idea.
> > Every time the link goes down, A freezes. Is this what you want?
>
> I had to fight my end users about how to replicate a SQL Server da
On 8/6/22 03:40, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
On 2022-08-04 07:43:28 +, Sacheen Birhade wrote:
I have a very basic question about streaming replication feature of Postgres.
Let’s assume I have servers A, B, C, D, & E with postgres installed with
streaming replication as follow:
A à B ( sync repl
On 2022-08-04 07:43:28 +, Sacheen Birhade wrote:
> I have a very basic question about streaming replication feature of Postgres.
> Let’s assume I have servers A, B, C, D, & E with postgres installed with
> streaming replication as follow:
> A à B ( sync replication )
> A à C ( async replica
On 2022-08-05 17:47:02 +0200, Aleš Zelený wrote:
> the construct surprised me when I saw it in the function the first time, but
> it
> is correct and works as expected - it allows writing the function as SQL
> instead of PLPGSQL while it ensures that for a parameter null value it
> evaluates to tr
