We have tables which we archive and shorten every day. That is - the main table
that has daily inserts and updates is kept small, and there is a parallel table
with all the old data up to a year ago.
In the past we noticed that the bulk transfer from the main table to the
archive table takes a
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 8:34 PM, hari.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
Andreas maps...@gmx.net writes:
How would I group the table so that it shows groups that have
similarity () x ?
Lets say the table looks like this:
id, txt
1, aa1
2, bb1
3, cc1
4, bb2
5, bb3
6, aa2
...
How
Hi,
Dne 09.09.2012 11:25, Herouth Maoz napsal:
We have tables which we archive and shorten every day. That is - the
main table that has daily inserts and updates is kept small, and
there
is a parallel table with all the old data up to a year ago.
In the past we noticed that the bulk transfer
Thanks for your help.
Before posting, I had tried something like
check ((ALL(i) = 0) AND (ALL(i) = 1024 )));
but i got syntax errors.
It seems the first ALL() was not recognized.
Could someone give me documentation hints on this behaviour ?
vdg
On Saturday, 08 September 2012 13:18:25 Bret
Bret Stern wrote on 08.09.2012 22:18:
A better place for validation is in the front-end, before
adding/attempting to add data to the db (my opinion).
Nice to see there are always other ways though.
I beg to differ: every validation that can be enforced by declarative
constraints *should* be
Thomas Kellerer spam_ea...@gmx.net wrote:
Bret Stern wrote on 08.09.2012 22:18:
A better place for validation is in the front-end, before
adding/attempting to add data to the db (my opinion).
Nice to see there are always other ways though.
I beg to differ: every validation that can be
vdg vdg.encel...@gmail.com writes:
Before posting, I had tried something like
check ((ALL(i) = 0) AND (ALL(i) = 1024 )));
but i got syntax errors.
Well, that's not the syntax.
Could someone give me documentation hints on this behaviour ?
http://ledgersmbdev.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/or-modelling-interlude-postgresql-
vs.html
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
http://ledgersmbdev.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/or-modelling-interlude-postgresql-vs.html
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
On 09/09/12 23:12, vdg wrote:
Thanks for your help.
Before posting, I had tried something like
check ((ALL(i) = 0) AND (ALL(i) = 1024 )));
but i got syntax errors.
It seems the first ALL() was not recognized.
Could someone give me documentation hints on this behaviour ?
vdg
On Saturday,
We (PostgreSQL Europe) are considering to hold a PGDay on February 1st
2012, the day before FOSDEM, in Brussels, Belgium. This will be one
day of PostgreSQL presentations, in addition to the devroom we plan to
run during FOSDEM, in order to expand the PostgreSQL presence. It will
be a single track
Hi,
I've developed a system that was not to work online, but now it is
online and it is degrading due to bad design choices.
Here is the thing. I've the database build in vertical mode. I will
justo explain what I mean with that.
Attribute | Value
site_name | Some site name1
uri
On Sep 9, 2012, at 16:36, Andre Lopes lopes80an...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I've developed a system that was not to work online, but now it is
online and it is degrading due to bad design choices.
Here is the thing. I've the database build in vertical mode. I will
justo explain what I mean
13 matches
Mail list logo
