2008/8/15 Nick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I have a weird scenario on a table when I run this query...
>
> table1 has 1500 rows
> table2 has 1200 rows
> table2.id is a foreign key of table1.id
>
> SELECT COUNT(*) FROM table1
> WHERE id NOT IN (
> SELECT id FROM table2
> );
>
> however, using NOT EXISTS
On Aug 15, 2:14 pm, Dale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When ever I try and call the PERFORM statement I get:
> ERROR: syntax error at or near "PERFORM"
> even when I try executing something basic: PERFORM (2 + 3);
>
> Any ideas please?
>
> Dale.
I found my problem. Unfortunately PERFORM
Hi all,
Is there a way in Postgres to re-define, at the per user level, the
default permission set applied to a table as it is created?
Thanks!
-Glen
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpre
Hi,
When ever I try and call the PERFORM statement I get:
ERROR: syntax error at or near "PERFORM"
even when I try executing something basic: PERFORM (2 + 3);
Any ideas please?
Dale.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
h
I have a weird scenario on a table when I run this query...
table1 has 1500 rows
table2 has 1200 rows
table2.id is a foreign key of table1.id
SELECT COUNT(*) FROM table1
WHERE id NOT IN (
SELECT id FROM table2
);
however, using NOT EXISTS works
SELECT COUNT(*) FROM table1
WHERE NOT EXISTS (
If I read this correctly, you want the output sorted by
config_id,start_day(day),start_time,
thus:
select config_id, start_day as day, start_time, end_time from config
order by config_id, start_day, start_time;
Cheers,
Brent Wood
>>> novice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 08/15/08 3:55 PM >>>
Hi,
I ha
2008/8/15 novice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi,
> I have a table
>
> select id, config_id, start_day, end_day, start_time, end_time from config;
>
> id | config_id | start_day | end_day | start_time | end_time
> -+---+---+-++--
> 1 | 101 | Mon
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 04:20:14PM -0700, Roderick A. Anderson wrote:
> Anyone aware of an ER model for holding name server records?
What about a datatype? I have reason to believe that a company I used
to work for implemented such a thing. There was some talk of
releasing it, but I think there
Artacus wrote:
> Can you define a custom sort in postgres? For instance in mysql, you
> could do something like (I forget the exact syntax)
>
> ORDER BY FIND_IN_SET(column_name, ('one','two','three'))
The simplest direct mapping would probably be a CASE statement (see the
PostgreSQL documentation
Hi ,
below can work?
select config_id, start_day as day, start_time, end_time from config
union
select config_id, end_day as day, start_time, end_time from config
Best Regards,
Hui Xie
---
Axisoft Co. Ltd. Zhuhai Branch
Tel: (86) 0756-3612121 8858
novi
Hi Pavel,
Thank you for your reply, but in this case the “INSERT INTO ... RETURNING
field,... INTO STRICT variable,...;” is what works best for me currently.
Regards,
Dale Harris
-Original Message-
From: Pavel Stehule [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 14 August
Hi,
I have a table
select id, config_id, start_day, end_day, start_time, end_time from config;
id | config_id | start_day | end_day | start_time | end_time
-+---+---+-++--
1 | 101 | Mon | Sun | 08:30:00 | 18:00:00
2 |
Mr Anderson-you use an enum to indicate your DNSrecordtype as in this MySQL
exampleCREATE TABLE dns_updates| Field |Type | Null | Key |
Default | Extra || id| int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment ||
bd_order_id| int(11) | YES | | NULL
Anyone aware of an ER model for holding name server records?
Working on the zone file data and I am getting close but keep running
into the differences between MX records (with a priority) and the others
that can hold either a domain/sub-domain/host name or an IP address
depending on whether i
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 20:27, Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am Thursday, 14. August 2008 schrieb Clemens Schwaighofer:
> > Why is Postgres not using the indexes in the 8.3 installation.
>
> Might have something to do with the removal of some implicit casts. You
> should show us y
On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 10:22 -0700, Artacus wrote:
> Can you define a custom sort in postgres? For instance in mysql, you
> could do something like (I forget the exact syntax)
>
> ORDER BY FIND_IN_SET(column_name, ('one','two','three'))
>
You can sort by any column, or arbitrary expression or fu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 08/14/2008 01:21:26 AM:
> Hello.
>
> I create a table:
>
> CREATE TABLE groups (
> group_id serial PRIMARY KEY,
> name varchar(64) UNIQUE NOT NULL,
> guests integer[] DEFAULT '{}'
> )
>
> I add a new record to the table:
>
> INSERT INTO groups (name) VALUES ('M
Hello,
I'd like to ask you about some experience in managing huge databases which
store mostly binary files. We're developing a system which is likely to
grow up to terabytes in some years and I'd like to hear something from
people who really administrate these kinds of databases.
Please tell us
In response to Artacus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Can you define a custom sort in postgres? For instance in mysql, you
> could do something like (I forget the exact syntax)
>
> ORDER BY FIND_IN_SET(column_name, ('one','two','three'))
You could do this by defining an ENUM for the values. ENUMs sort
Artacus a écrit :
> Can you define a custom sort in postgres? For instance in mysql, you
> could do something like (I forget the exact syntax)
>
> ORDER BY FIND_IN_SET(column_name, ('one','two','three'))
>
I don't really know this syntax but isn't it something like :
ORDER BY column_name='one'
Can you define a custom sort in postgres? For instance in mysql, you
could do something like (I forget the exact syntax)
ORDER BY FIND_IN_SET(column_name, ('one','two','three'))
Art
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 8:48 AM, Gauthier, Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Try this...
>
> Set default_statistics_target to be 1000 in postgres.conf then reboot
> your pg server. "Analyze" the table. Try the query again.
A reload is enough. I think you might have to disconnect and
reconnect y
On Tue, 2008-08-12 at 17:25 +0200, Daneel wrote:
>
> When I run
> service postgresql initdb
> I get
> "se: [FAILED]".
> However, /var/lib/pqsql/data is created and user postgres owns it.
>
> But then I run
> service postgresql start
> and the very same error occurs..
Anything in /var/lib/pgs
Try this...
Set default_statistics_target to be 1000 in postgres.conf then reboot
your pg server. "Analyze" the table. Try the query again.
If that fails, drop the index on (field1, field3) and recreate the other
way around (field3, field1). Analyze again and try the query.
-dave
-Origi
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 18:47, Scott Marlowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What does "explain analyze select (your query here)" have to say?
>
Expalin analyze says it makes sequential scan on a table table1.
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 18:48, Gauthier, Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Try this...
What does "explain analyze select (your query here)" have to say?
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
On 14 août 08, at 16:28, Dmitry Teslenko wrote:
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 17:55, Igor Neyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Dmitry Teslenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 6:57 AM
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Strange query plan
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 17:55, Igor Neyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Dmitry Teslenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 6:57 AM
> To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Subject: Strange query plan
>
> Hello!
>
> I have following table:
>
-Original Message-
From: Dmitry Teslenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 6:57 AM
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Strange query plan
Hello!
I have following table:
CREATE TABLE table1 (
field1 INTEGER NOT NULL,
field2 INTEGER NOT NULL,
This may be a long shot... But I had a slow query once on a large table
because the query plan was doing a sequential scan, even after analyze.
I set "default_statistics_target" to 1000 (in postgres.conf), rebooted
and reanalyzed. A much better query plan was developed as a result and
the query w
Joost Kraaijeveld wrote:
> > ALTER TABLE ... ALTER COLUMN TYPE might help you. Use the USING clause
> > if you need a non-default data conversion -- in this case it might look
> > like USING (col = '1') or some such.
>
> ALTER TABLE odbcdest ALTER COLUMN odbc_bool TYPE bool
>
> gives:
>
> ERRO
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 4:18 AM, Daneel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Martin Marques wrote:
>>
>> Daneel escribió:
>>>
>>> Daneel wrote:
While going through
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Detailed_installation_guides
and typing
service postgresql start
as root I got
>>
Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 9:25 AM, Daneel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
While going through
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Detailed_installation_guides
and typing
service postgresql start
as root I got
"/var/lib/pgsql/data is missing. Use "service postgresql initdb" to
initializ
Martin Marques wrote:
Daneel escribió:
Daneel wrote:
While going through
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Detailed_installation_guides
and typing
service postgresql start
as root I got
"/var/lib/pgsql/data is missing. Use "service postgresql initdb" to
initialize the cluster first."
When I r
Scott Marlowe wrote:
PLEASE DON'T WRITE TO THIS LIST WITH A FAKE EMAIL ADDRESS.
It's been discussed before, but it's rude and counterproductive. Just
set up a filter / account that drops everything coming in, but don't
stick the rest of us with your broken email behaviour
I'm sorry, just foll
Tom Tom wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Tom Tom wrote:
Tom Tom wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We have a very strange problem when restoring a database on Windows XP.
> The PG version is 8.1.10
> The backup was made with the pg_dump on the same machine.
>
> pg_restore -F c -
the columns referenced in the predicate need to reference columns
whichimplement indexes to avert FTSAnyone else?Martin
__ Disclaimer and confidentiality
note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relates to the official
business of Sender. T
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 15:30, Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am Thursday, 14. August 2008 schrieb Dmitry Teslenko:
>> SELECT SUM(...) FROM table1 WHERE field3 = 'ABC' AND field1 <> 1
>> GROUP BY field2
>>
>> And planner picks up a sequential scan of a table. Why does he?
>
> P
"Clemens Schwaighofer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Any tips why this is so?
They don't appear to contain the same data.
If they do have you run analyze recently?
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostGIS support!
--
Sent vi
Am Thursday, 14. August 2008 schrieb Dmitry Teslenko:
> SELECT SUM(...) FROM table1 WHERE field3 = 'ABC' AND field1 <> 1
> GROUP BY field2
>
> And planner picks up a sequential scan of a table. Why does he?
Presumably because it thinks it is the best plan, and I see no reason to doubt
that
Am Thursday, 14. August 2008 schrieb Clemens Schwaighofer:
> Why is Postgres not using the indexes in the 8.3 installation.
Might have something to do with the removal of some implicit casts. You
should show us your table definitions.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postg
Hello!
I have following table:
CREATE TABLE table1 (
field1 INTEGER NOT NULL,
field2 INTEGER NOT NULL,
field3 CHARACTER(30),
... some more numeric fields)
I have also those indexes:
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX idx1 ON table1 USING btree (field3, field2, field1)
CREATE IN
Hi,
i just stumbled on something very strange.
I have here a Postgres 8.3 and a Postgres 8.2 installation, as I am in
the process of merging. Both are from the debian/testing tree, both have
the same configuration file.
In my DB where I found out this trouble I have two tables, I do a very
simpl
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 2:55 AM, Craig Ringer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> William Temperley wrote:
>> A. Two databases, one for transaction processing and one for
>> modelling. At arbitrary intervals (days/weeks/months) all "good" data
>> will be moved to the modelling database.
>> B. One databas
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Tom Tom wrote:
> >> Tom Tom wrote:
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> We have a very strange problem when restoring a database on Windows XP.
> >>> The PG version is 8.1.10
> >>> The backup was made with the pg_dump on the same machine.
> >>>
> >>> pg_restore -F c -h localhost -p 543
Richard Huxton wrote, On 15-Jul-2008 15:19:
Sergey Konoplev wrote:
Yes it is. But it the way to break integrity cos rows from table2
still refer to deleted rows from table1. So it conflicts with
ideology isn't it?
Yes, but I'm not sure you could have a sensible behaviour-modifying
BEFORE tri
Hello.
I create a table:
CREATE TABLE groups (
group_id serial PRIMARY KEY,
name varchar(64) UNIQUE NOT NULL,
guests integer[] DEFAULT '{}'
)
I add a new record to the table:
INSERT INTO groups (name) VALUES ('My friends');
Now the table contains 1 record:
| group_id |name| gues
Hello
you can wrap INSERT STATEMENT into function. Than you can do anything
with result;
create table f(a timestamp);
postgres=# select * from (insert into f values(current_timestamp)
returning *) x where x.a > now();
ERROR: syntax error at or near "into"
LINE 1: select * from (insert into f va
I've found my solution as in the help file under "RETURNING INTO". It would
be nice if this was referenced on the INSERT documentation.
Dale
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 14 August 2008 15:32
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: [GENERAL] cannot use result of (insert .. ret
49 matches
Mail list logo
