Table spaces (was Re: [GENERAL] State of Beta 2)

On Sun, 2003-09-14 at 23:08, Tom Lane wrote: > Network Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > ... However it seems to me that right now that this might not be > > possible while the backend is changing between major releases. > > Perhaps once that doesn't fluxate as much it might be feasibl

Re: [GENERAL] [PERFORM] best arrangement of 3 disks for (insert) performance

On Sat, 2003-09-13 at 23:44, Cott Lang wrote: > > Having WAL on a separate drive from the database would be something of > > a win. I'd buy that 1 disk for OS+WAL and then RAID [something] > > across the other two drives for the database would be pretty helpful. > > Just my .02, > > I did a lot

Re: need for in-place upgrades (was Re: [GENERAL] State of

On Sun, 2003-09-14 at 12:55, Williams, Travis L, NEO wrote: > Not that my DB is that big.. but if it was and it contained any sort of > financial data (something that you might want to dispute 2 years down > the road) then I would have multiple replicated systems (which I do have > .. but they are

Re: [GENERAL] How to remove CLUSTERs and 'partitioning tables'

After a long battle with technology,[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gabriele Bartolini), an earthling, wrote: >just a quick and probably stupid question. When I make a cluster > based on an index on a table, how can I remove it later? Should I > 'create' a new one by using the primary key index? There are

Re: [GENERAL] need for in-place upgrades (was Re: State of

In the last exciting episode, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ron Johnson) wrote: > On Sun, 2003-09-14 at 14:17, Christopher Browne wrote: >> discusses how to use their hardware and >> software products to do terabytes of backups in an hour. They sell a >> software product called "Ale

[GENERAL] Fox Trot bows to us

http://www.ucomics.com/foxtrot/2003/09/14/ -- Jeff Boes vox 269.226.9550 ext 24 Database Engineer fax 269.349.9076 Nexcerpt, Inc. http://www.nexcerpt.com ...Nexcerpt... Extend your

[GENERAL] Odd behaviour -- Index scan vs. seq. scan

I can't find a reasonable explanation for this. I have a table game, with primary key gameid (an int). If I use a where involving gameid and <, or >, or <=, or >=, then I get a sequential scan. If I use =, then of course I get an Index scan. More surprising to me is the fact that using BETWEEN,

Re: need for in-place upgrades (was Re: [GENERAL] State of

On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 14:40, Lamar Owen wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > It is alot but is is not a lot for something like an Insurance company > > or a bank. Also 100TB is probably non-compressed although 30TB is still > > large. > > Our requirements are such that this figure is our best gue

Re: [GENERAL] Odd behaviour -- Index scan vs. seq. scan

explain delete from game where gameid = 1000; Index Scan using game_pkey on game (cost=0.00..3.14 rows=1 width=6) explain delete from game where gameid < 1000; Seq Scan on game (cost=0.00..4779.50 rows=200420 width=6) explain delete from game where gameid between 1000 and 200

Re: need for in-place upgrades (was Re: [GENERAL] State of

On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 14:40, Lamar Owen wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > It is alot but is is not a lot for something like an Insurance company > > or a bank. Also 100TB is probably non-compressed although 30TB is still > > large. > > Our requirements are such that this figure is our best gue

[GENERAL] Rules question

I am starting to work with rules. I think I have them down but the folowing one is giving me grief. It tells me that it has rewritten 100 times and probably has looped. The columns ID and Location make up the primary key so I am sure that the result update should only effect one row. Anyone

Re: [GENERAL] State of Beta 2

On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 13:24, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > Strawmen. If we provide a good upgrade capability, we would just > > simply have to think about upgrades before changing features like > > that. The upgrade code could be cognizant of these sorts of things; > > and shoud be, in fact. > >

Re: [GENERAL] State of Beta 2

On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 15:23, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > I'm not going to rehash the arguments I have made before; they are all > > archived. Suffice to say you are simply wrong. The number of > > complaints over the years shows that there IS a need. > > > I at no point suggested that there wa

[GENERAL] Idea for improving speed of pg_restore

Hi, While on the topic of "need for in-place upgrades", I got to think- ing how the pg_restore could be speeded up. Am I wrong in saying that in the current pg_restore, all of the indexes are created in serial? How about this new, multi-threaded way of doing the pg_restore: 0. On the command lin

Re: [GENERAL] [PORTS] plPHP for windows

Hello, I don't see why it wouldn't run on Windows (or any Unix for that matter), we just aren't a Windows house and it is a little difficult to test. Sincerely, Joshua Drake Robert Treat wrote: I don't think it's supported on anything other than linux, but your best bet is to email the comma

Re: [GENERAL] State of Beta 2

Hmmm. A (US-oriented) hypothetical: BOSS: The app works now. Why rock the boat? DBA: The new version has features that will save 20% disk space, and speed up certain operations by 75% every day. BOSS: Fantastic! How long will it take to upgrade? DBA: 18 hours. BOSS: 18 hours!! We can only

[GENERAL] Initalizing PostgreSQL Database

I'm getting the following error message when I try to create a user or database on postgresql 7.2.2 on Freebsd 4.7, I installed it from the ports directory but I'm stumped when I got the following error message. When I do a /usr/local/etc/rc.d/010.pgsql.sh start all I get is this: freebsd# sh 0

Re: [GENERAL] Initalizing PostgreSQL Database

On Monday 15 September 2003 15:10, KG wrote: > I'm getting the following error message when I try to create a user or > database on postgresql 7.2.2 on Freebsd 4.7, I installed it from the ports > directory but I'm stumped when I got the following error message. When I do I don't know anything abo

Re: [GENERAL] Initalizing PostgreSQL Database

KG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm stumped when I got the following error message. When I do a > /usr/local/etc/rc.d/010.pgsql.sh start all I get is this: > freebsd# sh 010.pgsql.sh start > pgsqlfreebsd# There are a lot of shoddy start scripts running around :-(. Yours is probably dumping the

Re: [GENERAL] Initalizing PostgreSQL Database

Quoting Richard Huxton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Monday 15 September 2003 15:10, KG wrote: > > I'm getting the following error message when I try to create a user or > > database on postgresql 7.2.2 on Freebsd 4.7, I installed it from the ports > > directory but I'm stumped when I got the followin