Dejan wrote on 24.05.2009 01:19:
Computer which hosted a database crashed, but I managed to save data
folder. I copied it to another computer and pointed postgres to that folder
(stopping the service first). But, the service cannot start. Progress bar
just goes for awhile, and then a pop-up
Dejan wrote:
Computer which hosted a database crashed, but I managed to save data
folder. I copied it to another computer and pointed postgres to that folder
(stopping the service first). But, the service cannot start. Progress bar
just goes for awhile, and then a pop-up tells me that the
mnavahan wrote:
1.have postgresql support online change of tables ?
for example i have over 400 table in db with many relation :
A: if i dont any user connect to table RR (but many user connect to other
tables) can in online Db i change table RR ?
Yes.
B: if table A have FK to B can
Thanks Tom for your comments.
I meant the build in this directory:
http://www.postgresql.org/ftp/binary/v8.3.6/win32/, and the builds for win32
of other versions in the binary directory.
What is the trend of these builds regarding floating point timestamps? For
example what about 8.4?
Thanks,
database crashes. It's not meant
what mean in PG databse crash can i crash db without any hardware problem
and disk over (in not av !) ?
The only thing that's likely to make things go pear-shaped is if the
postmaster is forcibly killed ( kill -9 ) while the worker children are
running, then
On 2009-05-23, Havasvölgyi Ottó havasvolgyi.o...@gmail.com wrote:
--0016364c779590a8c0046a9321b6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi,
I don't know why this query returns false:
SELECT '20040506 070809.01'::timestamp(6) - '20010203
Le dimanche 24 mai 2009 à 11:34:46, mnavahan a écrit :
[...]
Temp tables are allocated on disk. However, they get the normal benefits
of PostgreSQL's caching, and tend to be very fast. You can put them in a
tablespace on a RAM disk or the like if you want, though.
i read some about PG but
now can help me for below :
what mean in PG databse crash can i crash db without any hardware problem
and disk over (in not av !) ?
(linux or win )
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/do-postgresql-this-job-for-me---%28firebird-user%29-tp23690611p23694068.html
Sent from the
thx of help
now can help me for below :
what mean in PG databse crash can i crash db without any hardware problem
and disk over (in not av !) ?
(linux or win )
best regards
--
View this message in context:
Le dimanche 24 mai 2009 à 16:12:29, mnavahan a écrit :
thx of help
now can help me for below :
what mean in PG databse crash can i crash db without any hardware problem
and disk over (in not av !) ?
(linux or win )
Nope.
--
Guillaume.
http://www.postgresqlfr.org
http://dalibo.com
--
Conrad Lender wrote:
So I guess it's like Stefan Keller said in a different
thread today: Know when to break the rules.
Amen. As I have seen posted on another recent thread, anyone who tells
you that one way is *always* correct, and the other is *always*
incorrect, is lying.
Joe
--
Sent
mnavahan wrote:
now can help me for below :
what mean in PG databse crash can i crash db without any hardware problem
and disk over (in not av !) ?
(linux or win )
Like any software, PostgreSQL has bugs (though once identified, they
don't seem to last long). Crash bugs are rare, though,
Craig Ringer cr...@postnewspapers.com.au writes:
[ much good info snipped ]
The only thing that's likely to make things go pear-shaped is if the
postmaster is forcibly killed ( kill -9 ) while the worker children are
running, then the postmaster is re-started.
Actually, even that doesn't
Craig Ringer wrote on 24.05.2009 17:58:
There isn't currently any REINDEX CONCURRENTLY option
But them manual does list this option:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/sql-createindex.html
When this option is used, PostgreSQL will build the index without taking any
locks that prevent
On May 24, 2009, at 8:58 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
There isn't currently any REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
option, but people seem to have a few workarounds that do the job if
you
really do need to rebuild an index on a live, active table.
It's pretty straight-forward to do:
CREATE INDEX
Christophe x...@thebuild.com writes:
On May 24, 2009, at 8:58 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
There isn't currently any REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
option, but people seem to have a few workarounds that do the job if you
really do need to rebuild an index on a live, active table.
It's pretty
Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com writes:
On Fri, 2009-05-22 at 15:24 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
There's no way we could implement that without a protocol change,
and it doesn't seem worth it to me. The idea that the client gets
to choose seems like a bad idea from a security standpoint
Ron Mayer rm...@cheapcomplexdevices.com writes:
Sam Mason wrote:
You get an error because 123 11 isn't a valid literal of an
(undecorated) INTERVAL type.
Hmm. should it be?
Well, we do allow it if it's *explicitly* stated to be a day to hour
interval:
regression=# select interval '123
Hola a todos:
Tengo la siguiente inquietud. En una consulta com la siguiente:
select campo1,
campo2,
campo1 - campo2 as campo_virtual,
campo3,
case when campo_virtual = 1 then 5 else 0 end as segundo_campo_virtual
from tabla;
Esto lo puedo hacer en access sin ningun problema, pero en
Thomas Kellerer wrote:
Craig Ringer wrote on 24.05.2009 17:58:
There isn't currently any REINDEX CONCURRENTLY option
But them manual does list this option:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/sql-createindex.html
When this option is used, PostgreSQL will build the index without
Hey list,
I have a table with user IDs, among other information. I also have a
table of comments that users can place on a page.
CREATE TABLE users (
id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
...
);
CREATE TABLE comments (
id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
userid INTEGER REFERENCES users (id) ON DELETE RESTRICT,
APseudoUtopia wrote:
Hey list,
I have a table with user IDs, among other information. I also have a
table of comments that users can place on a page.
CREATE TABLE users (
id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
...
);
CREATE TABLE comments (
id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
userid INTEGER REFERENCES users (id) ON
APseudoUtopia wrote:
1. Do I need NOT NULL in the comments(userid) column?
Yes, unless you want it to be possible for a comment to have a NULL
`userid' field.
Foreign key REFERENCES state that _if_ there is a value in the
referencing field, it must exist in the referenced key. The foreign key
23 matches
Mail list logo
