On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 11:07:00 -0800 (PST), Dennis Gearon
gear...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
I haven't been able to find anywhere, easily, in the documentation
using google
where a list of allowed data types for primary keys is.
So, UUIDs can be primary keys?
Any issues wtih them on sorting or paging of
Can PLPerl make ODBC connect.
I have perl test connect. It work well
use DBI;
my $h = DBI-connect(
'dbi:ODBC:DRIVER=SQL
Server;Server=127.0.0.1;Database=TEST;Uid=sa;Pwd=abc123ABC;Port=1433',
'sa',
'abc123ABC',
{ AutoCommit = 1, RaiseError = 1, }
) or die Did not connect to db.;
On 01/05/2011 07:31 PM, Radosław Smogura wrote:
* you have your id, before executing query, (in contrast to all this
autoincrement) so you may put it in dependant rows
Do you mean that with a UUID, you don't need to talk to the database at
all, you can generate an ID with no interaction with
I have error when build plperl
1-- Build started: Project: plperl, Configuration: Release Win32 --
1Generate DEF file
1Not re-generating PLPERL.DEF, file already exists.
1Linking...
1 Creating library Release\plperl\plperl.lib and object
Release\plperl\plperl.exp
1SPI.obj : error
I want to get all the dependencies of a table, I know how to get the index
list using sql, but I don't know how to get the list of objects who using a
function, for example:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION reverse_last_64(TEXT) RETURNS TEXT AS $$
SELECT
array_to_string(
ARRAY
( SELECT substring($1,
Thanks for your help. But now facing new problem. While running the "initdb.exe -D ..\data -E UTF-8 --locale=C -U postgres" command the following unknown language printed. This should be in english. Please help me out.Filerna tillhörande databasen kommer att ägas av användaren "Administra
Denna
On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:50:11 +1100, Craig Ringer
cr...@postnewspapers.com.au wrote:
On 01/05/2011 07:31 PM, Radosław Smogura wrote:
* you have your id, before executing query, (in contrast to all this
autoincrement) so you may put it in dependant rows
Do you mean that with a UUID, you don't
On 5 January 2011 15:28, Radosław Smogura rsmog...@softperience.eu wrote:
On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:50:11 +1100, Craig Ringer
cr...@postnewspapers.com.au wrote:
On 01/05/2011 07:31 PM, Radosław Smogura wrote:
* you have your id, before executing query, (in contrast to all this
On Jan 5, 2011, at 1:31 AM, Radosław Smogura wrote:
* simple to generate, and 128bit random is almost globally unique,
Almost? Should be totally unique, as long as your random source is decent
quality.
--
Scott Ribe
scott_r...@elevated-dev.com
http://www.elevated-dev.com/
(303) 722-0567
On Jan 5, 2011, at 7:28 AM, Radosław Smogura wrote:
It's simpler to write:
...
isn't it?
Depends on the situation, the libraries you're using, and so on.
Now, if you're generating records in a distributed system, where your node
might be disconnected when it's creating a record, it is *much*
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Scott Ribe scott_r...@elevated-dev.com wrote:
On Jan 5, 2011, at 1:31 AM, Radosław Smogura wrote:
* simple to generate, and 128bit random is almost globally unique,
Almost? Should be totally unique, as long as your random source is decent
quality.
But I
2011/1/5 Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz gryz...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Scott Ribe scott_r...@elevated-dev.com
wrote:
On Jan 5, 2011, at 1:31 AM, Radosław Smogura wrote:
* simple to generate, and 128bit random is almost globally unique,
Almost? Should be totally unique, as long as
On Jan 5, 2011, at 7:55 AM, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:
But I would never rely on that alone. You always have a strategy in
place, in case there's a duplicate.
That's really unnecessary, basically a total waste of effort.
--
Scott Ribe
scott_r...@elevated-dev.com
http://www.elevated-dev.com/
In response to Scott Ribe scott_r...@elevated-dev.com:
On Jan 5, 2011, at 1:31 AM, Radosław Smogura wrote:
* simple to generate, and 128bit random is almost globally unique,
Almost? Should be totally unique, as long as your random source is decent
quality.
This is going off-topic, but
On Jan 5, 2011, at 8:03 AM, Mike Christensen wrote:
As long as all your UUIDs are generated with the same algorithm, they
are guaranteed to be unique.
There is no requirement that they be generated with the same algorithm in order
to be unique. A MAC/time-based UUID cannot duplicate a random
On Jan 5, 2011, at 8:05 AM, Bill Moran wrote:
Beyond that, the namespace size for a UUID is so incomprehensibly huge
that the chance of two randomly generated UUIDs having the same value
is incomprehensibly unlikely
Yes, as in: it is *far* more likely that all of your team members and all of
Hi. I propose new feature - allow archive command to copy part of not
full filled wal segment. It need new parameter %b - number of bytes
used in segment . Then one can use head or dd to archive wal and
reduce network traffic to standby server.
--
Sent from my mobile device
pasman
In response to Scott Ribe scott_r...@elevated-dev.com:
On Jan 5, 2011, at 8:05 AM, Bill Moran wrote:
Beyond that, the namespace size for a UUID is so incomprehensibly huge
that the chance of two randomly generated UUIDs having the same value
is incomprehensibly unlikely
Yes, as in: it
Scott Ribe scott_r...@elevated-dev.com writes:
On Jan 5, 2011, at 8:05 AM, Bill Moran wrote:
Beyond that, the namespace size for a UUID is so incomprehensibly huge
that the chance of two randomly generated UUIDs having the same value
is incomprehensibly unlikely
Yes, as in: it is *far* more
On 01/05/2011 08:55 AM, Bill Moran wrote:
In response to Scott Ribe scott_r...@elevated-dev.com:
On Jan 5, 2011, at 8:05 AM, Bill Moran wrote:
Beyond that, the namespace size for a UUID is so incomprehensibly huge
that the chance of two randomly generated UUIDs having the same value
is
I don't believe the EAL certification is valid for the community
version of PostgreSQL.
From the EAL certification report:
PostgreSQL Certified Version is a relational database management
system, which is applicable to enterprise business. It is an enhanced
version of the open source PostgreSQL
pasman pasmański pasma...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi. I propose new feature - allow archive command to copy part of not
full filled wal segment. It need new parameter %b - number of bytes
used in segment . Then one can use head or dd to archive wal and
reduce network traffic to standby server.
Use
On Jan 5, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Bill Moran wrote:
That statement demonstrates a lack of investigation and/or consideration
of the circumstances.
No, it doesn't.
However, if there are 5000 devices generating 100 UUIDs per hour, and you'll
be keeping those records for 10+ years, the chances of
On Wednesday 5. January 2011 16.05.29 Bill Moran wrote:
Beyond that, the namespace size for a UUID is so incomprehensibly huge
that the chance of two randomly generated UUIDs having the same value
is incomprehensibly unlikely ... it is, however, not a 100% guarantee.
I can't help thinking of
On Jan 5, 2011, at 9:01 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
In practical use I think the odds of a collision are *far* higher than
you are suggesting, unless the UUID generation is being done with a lot
more care than is likely if the user takes these sorts of claims at face
value.
Eh? The user taking such
On Jan 5, 2011, at 9:19 AM, Leif Biberg Kristensen wrote:
I can't help thinking of the «Birthday Paradox»:
Yes, the calculation of the probability of a collision is the same for the
birthday paradox as for random UUID collisions.
--
Scott Ribe
scott_r...@elevated-dev.com
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Mike Christensen m...@kitchenpc.com wrote:
2011/1/5 Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz gryz...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Scott Ribe scott_r...@elevated-dev.com
wrote:
On Jan 5, 2011, at 1:31 AM, Radosław Smogura wrote:
* simple to generate, and 128bit
On 01/05/2011 08:29 AM, Scott Ribe wrote:
On Jan 5, 2011, at 9:01 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
In practical use I think the odds of a collision are *far* higher than
you are suggesting, unless the UUID generation is being done with a lot
more care than is likely if the user takes these sorts of claims
Sorry for not citation...
When I was talking about almost unique, I was meaning that the UUID is
random so there is no guarantee that you will not generate two indencital
UUIDs even in subsequent calls, but it has low probability (you have
greater chances to win in LOTTO).
128bits is huge
Original Message
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] UUID column as pimrary key?
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 10:11:49 -0700
From: Scott Ribe scott_r...@elevated-dev.com
To: Adrian Klaver adrian.kla...@gmail.com
On Jan 5, 2011, at 9:57 AM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
Maybe or maybe not:)
So... If
2011/1/5 flying eagle eaglein...@gmail.com
I want to get all the dependencies of a table, I know how to get the index
list using sql, but I don't know how to get the list of objects who using a
function, for example:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION reverse_last_64(TEXT) RETURNS TEXT AS $$
On Jan 5, 2011, at 10:30 AM, Radosław Smogura wrote:
128bits is huge for now, but what will happen in next 2,3 years?
It will still be large. When you get up to around 100 trillion UUIDs, you'll be
getting up to around a 1 in a billion chance of a single collision. Before you
claim that we'll
Hello!
I connect to PostgreSQL database in my C++ program via libpq and I need to
implement the function like void SendQuery(char* queryString, void
(*callback)(void*)) which will .
But how to bind the callback function data (and some parameters) to database
request?
I intended to put queries into
2011/1/5 Вячеслав Блинников slav...@gmail.com:
I intended to put queries into queue (along with callback and param data)
and after fetching each result via PQgetResult() obtain callback and param
from the queue, but documentation says that PQexec can return only one
PGresult structure. If the
Database connection using libpq:
So, generally speaking, I need:
- send multiple queries using PQsendQuery() (or what else)
- bind some data (void*) to each qeury
- obtain results using PQgetResult() (or what else) and to know which data
is bound to each result (correspondence between queries and
Scott Ribe scott_r...@elevated-dev.com Wednesday 05 January 2011 17:33:51
On Jan 5, 2011, at 9:19 AM, Leif Biberg Kristensen wrote:
I can't help thinking of the «Birthday Paradox»:
Yes, the calculation of the probability of a collision is the same for the
birthday paradox as for random UUID
In response to Rob Sargent robjsarg...@gmail.com:
On 01/05/2011 08:55 AM, Bill Moran wrote:
In response to Scott Ribe scott_r...@elevated-dev.com:
On Jan 5, 2011, at 8:05 AM, Bill Moran wrote:
Beyond that, the namespace size for a UUID is so incomprehensibly huge
that the chance
In response to Scott Ribe scott_r...@elevated-dev.com:
On Jan 5, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Bill Moran wrote:
That statement demonstrates a lack of investigation and/or consideration
of the circumstances.
No, it doesn't.
However, if there are 5000 devices generating 100 UUIDs per hour, and
On Jan 5, 2011, at 11:31 AM, Radosław Smogura wrote:
The true is that probability
that in two coin drops we will get two reverses is 1/4, but true is, too, as
Newton said, it's 1/3, because if in 1st drop we don't get reverse we don't
need to drop again.
Nonsense. You don't stop
Yes, the ID is generated before the database is contacted, in my case anyway.
The type of UUID that I want is a hybrid, so I would have to write a stored
procedure and then a trigger upon insert to get the UUID. Not rocket science, I
just have more on my plate than I can handle. So PHP is my
On Jan 5, 2011, at 12:03 PM, Bill Moran wrote:
For crying out loud. If you're going to pick me apart with numbers, then
actually do it with some intelligence.
If you're going to get nasty, at least try to be accurate.
I could easily counter your argument by upping the numbers to 500,000
On 01/05/2011 11:57 AM, Bill Moran wrote:
In response to Rob Sargent robjsarg...@gmail.com:
On 01/05/2011 08:55 AM, Bill Moran wrote:
In response to Scott Ribe scott_r...@elevated-dev.com:
On Jan 5, 2011, at 8:05 AM, Bill Moran wrote:
Beyond that, the namespace size for a UUID is so
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 05:49, tuanhoanganh hatua...@gmail.com wrote:
I have error when build plperl
1-- Build started: Project: plperl, Configuration: Release Win32 --
1Generate DEF file
1Not re-generating PLPERL.DEF, file already exists.
1Linking...
1 Creating library
2011/1/5 Вячеслав Блинников slav...@gmail.com:
Database connection using libpq:
So, generally speaking, I need:
- send multiple queries using PQsendQuery() (or what else)
- bind some data (void*) to each qeury
- obtain results using PQgetResult() (or what else) and to know which data
is
On Jan 5, 2011, at 1:13 PM, Raymond O'Donnell wrote:
Is that taking dark matter into account? :-)
It's not clear to me ;-)
--
Scott Ribe
scott_r...@elevated-dev.com
http://www.elevated-dev.com/
(303) 722-0567 voice
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To
On 05/01/2011 19:41, Scott Ribe wrote:
to every atom in the observable universe, or 10^51 UUIDs to every
atom in the total universe using high-end estimates of the size of
the non-observable universe)?
Is that taking dark matter into account? :-)
Ray.
--
Raymond O'Donnell :: Galway ::
In response to Rob Sargent robjsarg...@gmail.com:
In our case (and I expect it's the case with most people considering UUIDs)
we're talking about independent devices that occasionally synchronize
data between themselves. These devices need to generate a unique ID
of some sort without
The whole thing is:
- server connect to the database and wait for incoming connections
- when incoming connection occurs, server request the database for some data
about connected client - server must do it asynchronously and without
creating any threads just for connected client (there can be
On 01/05/2011 01:43 PM, Bill Moran wrote:
In response to Rob Sargent robjsarg...@gmail.com:
In our case (and I expect it's the case with most people considering UUIDs)
we're talking about independent devices that occasionally synchronize
data between themselves. These devices need to
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 12:41:43PM -0700, Scott Ribe wrote:
I'm not sidestepping the point at all.
You may be missing it, however, because. . .
The point is that the finiteness of the space is a red herring. The
space is large enough that there's no chance of collision in any
realistic
2011/1/5 Вячеслав Блинников slav...@gmail.com:
The whole thing is:
- server connect to the database and wait for incoming connections
- when incoming connection occurs, server request the database for some data
about connected client - server must do it asynchronously and without
creating any
From wikipedia, only after generating 1 billion UUIDs every second for
the next 100 years, the probability of creating just one duplicate would
be about 50%. The probability of one duplicate would be about 50% if
every person on earth owns 600 million UUIDs.
Even if the chances of one person
On 01/05/2011 03:39 PM, Alban Hertroys wrote:
From wikipedia, only after generating 1 billion UUIDs every second for
the next 100 years, the probability of creating just one duplicate would
be about 50%. The probability of one duplicate would be about 50% if
every person on earth owns 600
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Bill Moran wmo...@potentialtech.com wrote:
But the point (that you are trying to sidestep) is that the UUID namespace
is finite, so therefore you WILL hit a problem with conflicts at some point.
Just because that point is larger than most people have to concern
Pooled id.. child machine connects to main and says give 1 of ids,
main increments counter by 1, child allocates in given pool.
On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 17:11:35 -0600, Michael Satterwhite
mich...@weblore.com wrote:
Once multiple machines are linked to maintain the database, this has
a flaw
On 6 January 2011 00:32, dennis jenkins dennis.jenkins...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Bill Moran wmo...@potentialtech.com
wrote:
But the point (that you are trying to sidestep) is that the UUID
namespace
is finite, so therefore you WILL hit a problem with conflicts
1: Didn't figured out what it does mean - can you explain it better?
2: Operation system will refuse me to create thousand threads and, anyway,
database will return responds averagely just when all of them will be
accomplished.
3: I never close a connection once it was created, so any pool will
dal...@solfertje.student.utwente.nl (Alban Hertroys) writes:
From wikipedia, only after generating 1 billion UUIDs every second for
the next 100 years, the probability of creating just one duplicate would
be about 50%. The probability of one duplicate would be about 50% if
every person on
a...@crankycanuck.ca (Andrew Sullivan) writes:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 12:41:43PM -0700, Scott Ribe wrote:
I'm not sidestepping the point at all.
You may be missing it, however, because. . .
The point is that the finiteness of the space is a red herring. The
space is large enough that
2011/1/6 Вячеслав Блинников slav...@gmail.com:
1: Didn't figured out what it does mean - can you explain it better?
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%84%D0%BE%D1%80_(%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%84%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0)
2: Operation system will refuse me to
I'm tracking a problem with our tables being bloated and was curious if
someone regularly kills autovacuum jobs, will autovacuum later reattempt
to vacuum the table it was killed under?
I've made autovacuum more aggressive and given more worker threads. Yet
for some reason we're not keeping
On Jan 5, 2011, at 3:03 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
...the example was not that UUIDs are being generated and collected
in one place at that rate, but that they're being generated in several
independent places at a time...
In order for a collision to matter, really in order for there to *be* a
On Jan 5, 2011, at 4:11 PM, Michael Satterwhite wrote:
Each machine would have a unique machine_id. This would guarantee uniqueness
and be very easy to maintain.
And if somebody clones the disk to a new machine, but leaves the old one in
service? Or do you use the MAC address and hope that's
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 06:22:08PM -0500, Chris Browne wrote:
But it seems to me that some of the analytics are getting a little *too*
paranoid, on the perhaps UUIDs are the wrong answer side of the
column.
That could be. I was simply noting that there are cases where one
could legitimately
I'm getting an error like this in the log a couple times a day on on my hot
standby server. Any suggestions?
23964 2011-01-04 05:23:00 EST [47]LOG: invalid record length at
6E53/46E8A010
23535 2011-01-04 05:23:00 EST [2]FATAL: terminating walreceiver process
due to administrator command
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 07:44:29PM -0700, Scott Ribe wrote:
In order for a collision to matter, really in order for there to *be* a
collision, the duplicate pair has to be collected in one place.
Not at the time of generation, though. They only have to end up in
the same place at once. For
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 07:46:18PM -0700, Scott Ribe wrote:
And if somebody clones the disk to a new machine, but leaves the old one in
service? Or do you use the MAC address and hope that's unique?
Excellent questions, and exactly the sort (as I was arguing elsewhere
in this thread) one has
2: Operation system will refuse me to create thousand threads and,
anyway,
database will return responds averagely just when all of them will be
accomplished.
I don't know how I can help you, since you haven't explained the
architecture of your application very well.
It does not make
Hi,
On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 18:08 -0700, u235sentinel wrote:
I'm tracking a problem with our tables being bloated and was curious
if someone regularly kills autovacuum jobs, will autovacuum later
reattempt to vacuum the table it was killed under?
In 8.3+, autovacuum kills itself if when it
69 matches
Mail list logo
