Hello and best wishes for this new year.
I have a question concerning the H2 DB.
http://www.h2database.com/html/main.html
I've read (on their site) that they got better perfs than PG or MySQL in
any case (embedded in a Java application and even as a standalone server).
Tests seem a bit light
I took your cue, and have formulated this solution for 8.3.1 :
create or replace function unknown2text(unknown) returns text as
$$ begin return text($1::char); end $$ language plpgsql;
drop cast (unknown as text);
create cast (unknown as text) with function unknown2text( unknown ) as
implicit;
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 2:04 AM, Gurjeet Singh singh.gurj...@gmail.com wrote:
I took your cue, and have formulated this solution for 8.3.1 :
Is there a good reason you're running against a db version with known
bugs instead of 8.3.5? Seriously, it's an easy upgrade and running a
version missing
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 2:04 AM, Gurjeet Singh singh.gurj...@gmail.com
wrote:
I took your cue, and have formulated this solution for 8.3.1 :
Is there a good reason you're running against a db version with known
bugs
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Pascal Cohen pco...@wimba.com wrote:
Hello and best wishes for this new year.
I have a question concerning the H2 DB.
http://www.h2database.com/html/main.html
I've read (on their site) that they got better perfs than PG or MySQL in any
case (embedded in a Java
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 2:24 AM, Gurjeet Singh singh.gurj...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 2:04 AM, Gurjeet Singh singh.gurj...@gmail.com
wrote:
I took your cue, and have formulated this solution for 8.3.1
Gurjeet Singh singh.gurj...@gmail.com writes:
create cast (unknown as text) with function unknown2text( unknown ) as
implicit;
This is a horrendously bad idea; it will bite your *ss sooner or later,
probably sooner.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing
2009/1/6 Tuan Hoang Anh hatua...@gmail.com:
Is there any postgres replication support windows (not slony because i want
merge replication) ?
I undestand that merge replication alows update in the suscribers. If
this correct
i think you will need something like bucardo, i think it must work on
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Gurjeet Singh singh.gurj...@gmail.com writes:
create cast (unknown as text) with function unknown2text( unknown ) as
implicit;
This is a horrendously bad idea; it will bite your *ss sooner or later,
probably sooner.
Gurjeet Singh singh.gurj...@gmail.com writes:
This is a horrendously bad idea; it will bite your *ss sooner or later,
probably sooner.
Can you please let us know how this would be problematic?
The point is that it's going to have unknown, untested effects on the
default coercion rules,
Greetings!
I just tried to do a search in the archives of this list for .Net
provider. The search returned results contained provided and
providing. Is there a way to make sure that my searches return only
messages containing strings that exactly match what I'm looking for?
Thank you very
Hi,
I am looking for is a hierarchical thesaurus not a linguistic one.
I found this open source project for mySQL
http://tematres.r020.com.ar/index.en.html
Does anyone know of sg similar for PostGre?
thx
Juergen
On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 09:06:43AM -0500, Rob Richardson wrote:
I just tried to do a search in the archives of this list for .Net
provider. The search returned results contained provided and
providing. Is there a way to make sure that my searches return only
messages containing strings that
Buenas tardes.
Cargue el parametro autovacuum_npatime en 86400, o sea cada 24 hs.
deberia ejecutarse, sin embargo me encuentro en el log el mensaje
WARNING: autovacuum not started because of misconfiguration
Alguien tiene idea?
Gracias
Gustavo
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-es-ayuda/
OR
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-es-fomento/
2009/1/6 Gustavo Rosso gro...@sadaic.org.ar:
Buenas tardes.
Cargue el parametro autovacuum_npatime en 86400, o sea cada 24 hs. deberia
ejecutarse, sin embargo me encuentro en el log el mensaje
Hi there,
On Windows, I run a script batch file with psql, and I get any log line with
the following pattern:
psql://path_file_name:4: NOTICE: log_message
I'd like to remove the log header before NOTICE. What should I do ?
Thanks,
Sabin
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list
Thanks for the advice Scott. I've taken out the vacuum fulls entirely.
I've now got a nightly vacuum analyze as well as reindex. I'll probably
drop both to every other night.
BTW, the database shrunk by 2 gigs just from reindexing last night. I
expect I'll see a performance gain from
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Sabin Coanda sabin.coa...@deuromedia.ro wrote:
Hi there,
On Windows, I run a script batch file with psql, and I get any log line with
the following pattern:
psql://path_file_name:4: NOTICE: log_message
I'd like to remove the log header before
2009/1/6 Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com:
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Pascal Cohen pco...@wimba.com wrote:
Hello and best wishes for this new year.
I have a question concerning the H2 DB.
http://www.h2database.com/html/main.html
I've read (on their site) that they got better perfs
you don't have to reindex too often - it locks exclusively whole
table, just like vacuum full. Just do it every few months, depending
on db growth.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
Sabin Coanda sabin.coa...@deuromedia.ro writes:
On Windows, I run a script batch file with psql, and I get any log line with
the following pattern:
psql://path_file_name:4: NOTICE: log_message
I'd like to remove the log header before NOTICE. What should I do ?
If you don't want
- Scot Kreienkamp skre...@la-z-boy.com wrote:
Thanks for the advice Scott. I've taken out the vacuum fulls
entirely.
I've now got a nightly vacuum analyze as well as reindex. I'll
probably
drop both to every other night.
BTW, the database shrunk by 2 gigs just from reindexing
Yep... dummy me. That works. I tried that before with the reindexdb
command, that doesn't work. I didn't try it with the psql command.
Thanks,
Scot Kreienkamp
La-Z-Boy Inc.
skre...@la-z-boy.com
-Original Message-
From: Adrian Klaver [mailto:akla...@comcast.net]
Sent: Tuesday,
Martin Gainty wrote:
Tony-
pgdump version 8.3 will dump multiple tables (with multiple -t)
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/app-pgdump.html
but I dont see the same multiple table functionality with pgrestore
Hi All,
This is a bit embarassing ... but ...
I have a partial set of data that I want to restore via COPY ... FROM command
I have created a public folder for the effect and chown'ed both the folder and
the file to be fed into COPY to a+rw ...
I switched users with su - postgres and
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz gryz...@gmail.com wrote:
you don't have to reindex too often - it locks exclusively whole
table, just like vacuum full. Just do it every few months, depending
on db growth.
While I don't wholly disagree with periodic reindexing, I do
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 11:41 AM, Pedro Doria Meunier
pdo...@netmadeira.com wrote:
Hi All,
This is a bit embarassing ... but ...
I have a partial set of data that I want to restore via COPY ... FROM command
I have created a public folder for the effect and chown'ed both the folder and
the
Pedro Doria Meunier pdo...@netmadeira.com writes:
All I'm getting is a Permission denied upon issuing the COPY command from
within psql interactive terminal!
Since you didn't show what you did or what the error was, we're just
guessing ... but I'm going to guess that you should use \copy not
Hi Scott
Txs for replying.
Anyway I've found the problem (silly me... (blush) )
It had to do (of course) with the forest perms in the folder tree ...
As soon as I moved the file into the data/ folder and executed the COPY ...
FROM feeding it the file from that location everything worked as
Greetings!
I am trying to learn how to use ADO.Net to access a PostGRESQL database
through C#, using MS Visual Studio 2008 on a Windows XP Pro box. At
first, I was using the PgOldDb provider for .Net, but it seems that that
provider is not complete. It did not work for me. I switched to ODBC
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Rob Richardson
rob.richard...@rad-con.com wrote:
Greetings!
Hi, Rob!
You can find the manual in the download file which has a section about
how to install and use Npgsql.
Also, you can find the user manual online at:
http://manual.npgsql.org
You will need to
Here is an interesting new datapoint.
Modern Ubuntu distro - PostgreSQL 8.1. SATA drive. No Raid. Cannot
reproduce slow vacuum performance - vacuums take less than a second
for the whole database.
Reinstall OS - Fedora Core 6 - PostgreSQL 8.1. Push data through
PostgreSQL for a couple hours
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Craig Ringer
cr...@postnewspapers.com.au wrote:
Alternately, rather than doing everything within PL/PgSQL, just do it from
normal SQL, issued through psql. That way you can just use \timing .
For simple one-liners, instead of:
psql -d DB1 -c 'select
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Gurjeet Singh singh.gurj...@gmail.com writes:
This is a horrendously bad idea; it will bite your *ss sooner or later,
probably sooner.
Can you please let us know how this would be problematic?
The point is that it's
Dan Armbrust escribió:
What on earth could be going on between PostgreSQL 8.1 and Fedora 6
that is bloating and/or corrupting the indexes like this?
Postgres 8.1 was slow to vacuum btree indexes. My guess is that your
indexes are so bloated that it takes a lot of time to scan them.
I think
My stumbling through the wilds of .Net, ADO.Net and PostGRESQL
continues...
I left out a critical requirement from my discussion of .Net providers:
They must be compatible with some generic data type inside a .Net
application. The most that is allowed to change is a connection string.
If I use
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Dan Armbrust
daniel.armbrust.l...@gmail.com wrote:
Here is an interesting new datapoint.
Modern Ubuntu distro - PostgreSQL 8.1. SATA drive. No Raid. Cannot
reproduce slow vacuum performance - vacuums take less than a second
for the whole database.
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Dan Armbrust escribió:
What on earth could be going on between PostgreSQL 8.1 and Fedora 6
that is bloating and/or corrupting the indexes like this?
Postgres 8.1 was slow to vacuum btree indexes. My guess is
On Tuesday 06 January 2009, Dan Armbrust daniel.armbrust.l...@gmail.com
wrote:
What on earth could be going on between PostgreSQL 8.1 and Fedora 6
that is bloating and/or corrupting the indexes like this?
Obviously the choice of operating system has no impact on the contents of
your index.
A
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Dan Armbrust
daniel.armbrust.l...@gmail.com wrote:
Here is an interesting new datapoint.
Modern Ubuntu distro - PostgreSQL 8.1. SATA drive. No Raid. Cannot
reproduce slow vacuum performance - vacuums take less than a second
for the whole database.
Obviously the choice of operating system has no impact on the contents of
your index.
A better question might be, what did your application or maintenance
procedures do different in the different tests?
--
Alan
Our problem for a long time has been assuming the obvious. But we
now have
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Rob Richardson
rob.richard...@rad-con.com wrote:
My stumbling through the wilds of .Net, ADO.Net and PostGRESQL continues...
With this requirement, I would suggest you to use dbproviderfactory
support of .Net
This is a sample link with informations about it:
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Dan Armbrust
daniel.armbrust.l...@gmail.com wrote:
Actually, the customer reported problem is that when they enable
autovacuum, the performance basically tanks because vacuum runs so
slow they can't bear to have it run frequently.
Actually this is kinda
Dan Armbrust daniel.armbrust.l...@gmail.com writes:
INFO: cpe: found 415925 removable, 50003 nonremovable row versions
in 10849 pages
What on earth could be going on between PostgreSQL 8.1 and Fedora 6
that is bloating and/or corrupting the indexes like this?
You're focusing on the indexes
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 3:36 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Dan Armbrust daniel.armbrust.l...@gmail.com writes:
INFO: cpe: found 415925 removable, 50003 nonremovable row versions
in 10849 pages
What on earth could be going on between PostgreSQL 8.1 and Fedora 6
that is bloating
On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 11:13:59PM +0530, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
If we consider the second branch of UNION ALL of both the queries above, if
select '' yields a text column, then so should a select * from (select
'').
The problem is ofcourse that select '' doesn't produce a text column
in
Scott Marlowe wrote:
While I don't wholly disagree with periodic reindexing, I do recommend
that one keeps track of bloat. It's easy enough to have an alarm that
goes off if any index gets over 50% dead space, then go look at the
database.
Reading this list, I've noticed that:
- Many
Pedro Doria Meunier wrote:
I have created a public folder for the effect and chown'ed both the folder
and
the file to be fed into COPY to a+rw ...
The server user (usually via the group or other permissions blocks)
must also have at least execute ('x') permissions on every directory
between
48 matches
Mail list logo
