Using the convert function might be of help here as well:convert(string using conversion_name)Change encoding using specified conversion name. Conversions can be defined by CREATE CONVERSION. Also there are some pre-defined conversion names (
Should there be any difference between:
select * from table1 a left join table2 b on a.pk=b.fk and b.typeid=14
and
select * from table1 a left join table2 b on a.pk=b.fk
where coalesce(b.typeid,14)=14
The reason I need to use the coalesce is because my goal is to do it with a
full join and
I figured out my problem.
Table1 and Table2 have matches for every pk,fk just not on typeid=14,
therefore when I join on just the pk,fk and do a where looking for null, it
doesn't find any rows that qualify.
Doesn't help me solve my problem, but at least I know where I'm at.
Sim
Sim Zacks
Hi,
We have huge amount of data, and we are planning to use logical
partitioning to divide it over multiple machines instances. We are
planning to use Intel based machines and there is not much updates but
mostly selects. The main table that constitutes this much of data has
about 5 columns, and
Richard Huxton wrote:
Bart McFarling wrote:
We are installing a new Postgresql server, it will not run anything else
but postgresql. We are currently looking at moving from a RHEL 4.0
system to FreeBSD.
Does one OS offer better performace over the other when running
postgresql?
I'd guess the
Shoaib Mir [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You can try one of these:
1. DBVisualiser
http://minq.se
2. PostgreSQL Autocad
http://www.rbt.ca/autodoc/index.html
3. Druid
http://sourceforge.net/projects/druid
4. SQLManager
http://sqlmanager.net/en/products/postgresql
5. Aqua Data Studio
Hi!
I'd like to know if there's any reasoning for not allowing creating an index
inside the same schema where the table is. For example, if I have a
multi-company database where each company has its own schema and its employees
table, shouldn't I have a different index for each of those? What
Dear all,
I am intending to use JMX to enable my application to be monitored by
the NMS. I am wondering is there any SNMP agent already build-up for
postgres DB and can be plugged into the JMX environment ?
I have found that a project for implementing a postgres db SNMP agent
I'd like to know if there's any reasoning for not allowing creating an index
inside the same schema where the table is. For example, if I have a
multi-company database where each company has its own schema and its employees
table, shouldn't I have a different index for each of those? What if
Rick Schumeyer wrote:
My database locale is en_US, and by default my databases are UTF8.
My application code allows the user to paste text into a box and submit
it to the database. Sometimes the pasted text contains non UTF8
characters, typically the fancy forms of quotes and
apparently date doesn't know anything about infinity. However, from what
I've read in my SQL for
smarties book regarding temporial database design, unknown future dates
were stored as:
'-12-31'
Would this help, since any enddate with this value would be be enterpreted
as an enddate that
On Sun, 2006-11-12 at 12:01 +0100, Péter Kovács wrote:
Richard Huxton wrote:
Bart McFarling wrote:
We are installing a new Postgresql server, it will not run anything else
but postgresql. We are currently looking at moving from a RHEL 4.0
system to FreeBSD.
Does one OS offer better
Chris Mair [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just say
create index testing123_index on testing.testing123 (otherthing);
and you'll otain exactly what you want (see below).
Bye, Chris.
I know I can workaround such debilitation. What I wanted to know is if
there's some reason (such as
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 01:38:30PM -0200, Jorge Godoy wrote:
Chris Mair [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just say
create index testing123_index on testing.testing123 (otherthing);
and you'll otain exactly what you want (see below).
Bye, Chris.
I know I can workaround such
create index testing123_index on testing.testing123 (otherthing);
and you'll otain exactly what you want (see below).
Bye, Chris.
I know I can workaround such debilitation. What I wanted to know is if
there's some reason (such as performance gain, for example) for that
decision.
hello,
I have two indexes on a table on cols col1 and col2, the table has ~10M
rows on pg v8.1.4
when I use where col1 = val1 the query is fast and returns 0 rows
when I use where col2 val2 the query is slow and returns ~1M rows
in both cases the corresponding indexes are used.
when I use
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
I have two indexes on a table on cols col1 and col2, the table has ~10M
rows on pg v8.1.4
when I use where col1 = val1 the query is fast and returns 0 rows
when I use where col2 val2 the query is slow and returns ~1M rows
in both cases the
apparently date doesn't know anything about infinity. However, from what
I've read in my SQL for
smarties book regarding temporial database design, unknown future dates
were stored as:
'-12-31'
Would this help, since any enddate with this value would be be enterpreted
as an
Sim Zacks [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Should there be any difference between:
select * from table1 a left join table2 b on a.pk=b.fk and b.typeid=14
and
select * from table1 a left join table2 b on a.pk=b.fk
where coalesce(b.typeid,14)=14
Quite a lot: every A row is guaranteed to appear in the
Jorge Godoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd like to know if there's any reasoning for not allowing creating an index
inside the same schema where the table is.
Actually, you've got that exactly backwards: it's not allowed to have
the index in a *different* schema from its parent table. Hence
yes, forgot to mention that the hole database is VACUUM ANALYZE after
the index creation, couple of times.
and also my message was incomplete and the problem is in the omission.
the order clause was not mentioned, witch I think is causing the
problem, by adding both columns in the order
Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog@svana.org writes:
I think his point was that the index is always in the same schema as
the table itself. It states this quite clearly in the documentation. So
what exactly is the debilitation? It seems to be doing exactly what you
want.
As Homer Simpson says:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jorge Godoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd like to know if there's any reasoning for not allowing creating an index
inside the same schema where the table is.
Actually, you've got that exactly backwards: it's not allowed to have
the index in a *different*
X-No-Archive: trueHi. As title. I'm getting a host of syntax errors, the last ten lines of which are ... NV_READ' undeclared (first use in this function) /usr/ports/databases/php4-pgsql/work/php-4.4.4/ext/pgsql/pgsql.c:1937: error: `INV_WRITE' undeclared (first use in this function)
X-No-Archive: trueSorry, I should have mentioned: the machine is FreeBSD 5.5-RELEASE, and I'm running make install clean in the port for PhP 4.D.Desmond Coughlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit:X-No-Archive: trueHi. As title. I'm getting a host of syntax errors, the last ten lines of
I didnt' think that DTS would export all ascpects of a MS SQL database
(constraints etc), which task specifially does that?
Shoaib Mir wrote:
You can use the DTS of SQL Server by specifying ODBC source for
PostgreSQL.
Thanks,
---
Shoaib Mir
EnterpriseDB (www.enterprisedb.com)
Thank you I'd not seen that page.
Robert Treat wrote:
On Saturday 11 November 2006 01:26, novnov wrote:
Any recommondations for a util that helps with conversion of MS SQL
Server
databases to Postgres? Constraints, triggers, etc?
Thanks
There are a couple of articles on this at
apparently date doesn't know anything about infinity. However, from
what
I've read in my SQL for
smarties book regarding temporial database design, unknown future
dates
were stored as:
'-12-31'
Would this help, since any enddate with this value would be be
enterpreted
as an
OK, thanks. I'm having a major internal debate about how I'm going to adjust
my habits to pgsql's 'lowercase is simplest' reality, all of this is
helpful.
One thing I've not been able to determine is if there are any characters
besides the standard alphanumeric ones and _ that do not invoke the
Hey,
I've gone and increased shared memory and now the deletes
seem to be really fast. I guess it had to do with postgresql not being
able to keep all the tables/indexes in memory and having to read/write
everything from the disk.
I'll look at the utils anyway and see if there really is
Cabbar Duzayak wrote:
Hi,
We have huge amount of data, and we are planning to use logical
partitioning to divide it over multiple machines instances. We are
planning to use Intel based machines and there is not much updates but
mostly selects. The main table that constitutes this much of data
Here's a description of the scenario. The question I'm asking follows
the description.
3 tables
table1:
job_no int4
rate1 float4
qty1 float4
rate2 float4
qty2 float4
rate3 float4
qty3 float4
table2:
job_no int4
part_id int4
rate float4
qty float4
table3:
job_no int4
desc varchar(32)
rate float4
I'm a little confused about what you mean when you say you can't specify where the index should go. Schemas are a logical division, not a physical one. There's no logical reason to have the index for a table in a separate schema. (And if one were limiting which schemas a user could access, there
33 matches
Mail list logo
