--- Willy-Bas Loos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> maybe you would find "materialized views" interesting.
> http://www.google.com/search?q=materialized+view+postgresql
>
>
> On 12/1/06, Matthew Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Is it possible to put an query result into memory? Like SELECT
On 11/30/06, hubert depesz lubaczewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11/30/06, Teodor Sigaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Fixed, thank you. Changes are commited in CVS, pls, try it (I think that
> index
> is corrupted, so you need to recreate it)
great. thanks. i will retry. full retry will t
Dear Friends,
I have a table as
\d userpref;
Table "public.userpref"
Column| Type | Modifiers
-++
username| character varying(101) | n
Vivek --
If you could let people know what version of postgres, and which OS, it might
help.
A guess: the planner sees that there are very few rows and decides that a
sequential scan is faster (this is because a sequential scan on a table with
only a few rows is probably done in one operation;
am Sat, dem 02.12.2006, um 16:35:47 +0530 mailte [EMAIL PROTECTED] folgendes:
>
> The index was created before the table was populated. There are 3 rows
> in the table for 3 different users. Now when I do a
In this case, with only 3 rows, it is much cheaper to do a seq-scan
instead a index-scan
On 12/2/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The index was created before the table was populated. There are 3 rows in
the table for 3 different users. Now when I do a
postgresql will not use index scan for table with 3 rows in it. it is way
faster to use seq scan on it.
depesz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I gave restricted permissions to the postgres user on the C: drive. After
doing this, I could run initdb without issue.
Something doesn't sit right with me with giving access to C: drive, but it
works. If anyone has any insights on what
this problem is/was and h
On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 08:26:53PM -0700, Brian Wipf wrote:
> Now I know the cause at least. If anyone has an idea on how to kill a
> similar hung connection without rebooting the server, I would
> appreciate any suggestions.
I'm unsure about why it wouldn't respond to a sigint, but did you tr
Matthew Peter wrote:
--- Willy-Bas Loos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
maybe you would find "materialized views" interesting.
http://www.google.com/search?q=materialized+view+postgresql
On 12/1/06, Matthew Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is it possible to put an query result into memory? Like S
Someone posted a solution to this in the last couple of days on this
list. Have a good look...
Cheers
Antoine
On 30/11/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I apologize for being yet another noob posting about this problem. I have
spent 2 days searching the archives and the
net
I haven't seen any replies to this, so I will,
although I am not a j2ee/jdbc person.
On fim, 2006-11-30 at 14:14 -0700, Nathan Wilhelmi wrote:
> Server: 8.0.3 on Solaris 9
> JDBC Driver: 8.0.311
...
> delete from X where id in (select bad_id from Z where name='qwerty');
> delete from Y where id i
On 2-Dec-06, at 6:27 AM, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 08:26:53PM -0700, Brian Wipf wrote:
Now I know the cause at least. If anyone has an idea on how to kill a
similar hung connection without rebooting the server, I would
appreciate any suggestions.
I'm unsure about wh
> > The problem I am having is on install of 8.1.5 it fails at the initdb call.
> > In checking the log, it seems to fail when
> > it creates the first data directory. It gets past the setting file
> > permissions, but when it tries to create data/global
> > it spits out an error message sayin
--- Shane Ambler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matthew Peter wrote:
> > --- Willy-Bas Loos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> maybe you would find "materialized views" interesting.
> >> http://www.google.com/search?q=materialized+view+postgresql
> >>
> >>
> >> On 12/1/06, Matthew Peter <[EMAIL P
Matthew Peter wrote:
Wouldn't it work just like plpgsql functions? Where the first call caches the
plan
or whatever?
A stored procedure can cache the query plan but that is separate from
caching data.
When sending sql select statements to the server the query plan isn't
cached (if it was
Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Tony Caduto wrote:
I did not have autovacuum turned on and I usually do a vacuumdb -z -a -f
-q each night but this one slipped through the cracks :-(
Strange -- autovacuum should have started an automatic database-
16 matches
Mail list logo
