Adrian Klaver wrote:
Snip
Are you sure the problem is not in $datefield = * . That the script that
formats the data file is not correctly adding * to the right file. Seems
almost like sometimes the second CMD is being run against the table that the
first CMD should be run on. In other
(Sorry for the forward, I forgot to CC the list)
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Herouth Maoz hero...@unicell.co.il wrote:
and for non-transaction tables (ones that have records that might
change but don't accumulate based on time) it's DELETE without WHERE.
In that case, you are better off
On Sunday 21 December 2008 1:49:18 am Herouth Maoz wrote:
Adrian Klaver wrote:
Snip
Are you sure the problem is not in $datefield = * . That the script
that formats the data file is not correctly adding * to the right file.
Seems almost like sometimes the second CMD is being run against
Howdy, all.
I have a log-shipping replication environment (based on PostgreSQL
8.3.4) using pg_lesslog+LZOP for compression of archived segments (kept
around long-term for possible use doing PITR). The slave came out of
synchronization recently, restoring a series of segments and then
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Oracle on the other hand stores the lock information directly in the data
block that is locked, thus the number of locks does not affect system
performance (in terms of managing them).
I couldn't find any
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 08:46:15PM -0500, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Oracle on the other hand stores the lock information directly in
the data block that is locked, thus the number of locks does not
affect system
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 9:42 PM, David Fetter da...@fetter.org wrote:
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 08:46:15PM -0500, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Oracle on the other hand stores the lock information directly in
the data
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Jonah H. Harris jonah.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 9:42 PM, David Fetter da...@fetter.org wrote:
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 08:46:15PM -0500, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com
Having dealt with cust service for a few commercial dbs, I can safely
say I get way better service from way smarter people when I have a
problem. And I don't have a lot of problems.
Clarificiation: That's saying I get better service and such from pg
users / developers than anywhere else.
--
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 11:04 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com wrote:
Having dealt with cust service for a few commercial dbs, I can safely
say I get way better service from way smarter people when I have a
problem. And I don't have a lot of problems.
Clarificiation: That's saying
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 11:02 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com wrote:
The difference is HE put forth an opinion about the pg developers
being smarter, but you put forth what seems like a statement of fact
with no evidence to back it up. One is quite subjective and open for
debate on
Jonah H. Harris wrote:
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 11:02 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com
wrote:
The difference is HE put forth an opinion about the pg developers
being smarter, but you put forth what seems like a statement of fact
with no evidence to back it up. One is quite
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 9:35 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Jonah H. Harris wrote:
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 11:02 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com
wrote:
The difference is HE put forth an opinion about the pg developers
being smarter, but you put forth what seems like a
13 matches
Mail list logo
