On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, Ed Loehr wrote:
> Kaiq may be wrong, possibly not knowing of more informative conversations
> going on in the private pgsql mailing lists (pg-core, etc.), but he is not
> coming from left field.
wow, there is a pg-core, can I get in? -- ok, maybe later, afte
perhaps you'd better first find an evaluation copy of informix, seems that
they have more systematic and well-thought feature set.
there are some historical relations between informix (esp. Object
relational features) -- share the same original source code!
my understanding is that more recent
here is the info. seems it's Hannu's fault :-)
hope helps.
Kai
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Mar 29 17:03:40 2000
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2000 00:15:34 -0600 (CST)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTE
On Fri, 24 Mar 2000, sheila bel wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I have a generel SQL question. What is the best way to
> avoid inserting duplicate tuples in a table ?
> using constraints ? Please refer me to a resource about
> this topic.
primary key -- which you can say is also a contraint.
of cour
that is the problem: you got to use select, otherwise, nothing to do with
PG. if you really mean to ask perl to do it, there is a very powerful
module (like PG's datetime feature) in perl (search CPAN by date)--I
almost used it, but since PG is so good at datetime (timestamp/interval),
I'm lazy.
On Tue, 7 Mar 2000, Ron Atkins wrote:
> *** IMPORTANT NOTE *** : I made an error, Kontor is not GPL'ed it is LGPL'ed...
>commercial
> developers might be interested in that :-)
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > > Sure, Kontor... it's GPLed and picking up steam! Go pick up a copy here:
> > >
On Mon, 6 Mar 2000, Ron Atkins wrote:
> > > Does somebody know some REALLY working accounting or inventory system on LAN
> > > (not via Internet)??? - where server is PostgreSQL .Because I have feeling that
>PostgreSQL
> > > is used only with regards to Internet.
>
> Sure, Kontor... it's GPLe
oops, it's "timestamp" now (just name change).
BTW, I remember datetime is in sql92. "timestamp" is also in sql92? why
"timestamp" is better than "datetime" ? sql99(96) ?
thanks!
On Fri, 25 Feb 2000, Barnes wrote:
> Nay, my friend, no mi
On Fri, 25 Feb 2000, Karl DeBisschop wrote:
>
> > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Fri, 25 Feb 2000, Karl DeBisschop wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >>To summarize, I stated that the following does not work with
> > > >>postgresql:
> > > >>
> > > >>> $dbh->{AutoCommit} = 0;
> > > >>> $
On Fri, 25 Feb 2000, Karl DeBisschop wrote:
>
> >>To summarize, I stated that the following does not work with
> >>postgresql:
> >>
> >>> $dbh->{AutoCommit} = 0;
> >>> $dbh->do("CREATE TABLE tmp (a int unique,b int)");
> >>> $rtv = $dbh->do("INSERT INTO tmp VALUES ($1,$2)");
> >>>
On Fri, 25 Feb 2000, Patrick Welche wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2000 at 09:56:59AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > do not use date, use datetime. why? it's sql92 standard (another
> > good reason: M$sql only has datetime :-). A lot of useful functions
> > only apply to datetime, not date.
3) is weird. it looks like a typical mistatke that use the data
as the schema. It is not flexible and waste of disk (ya, I know
it cheap. but it you waste too much!). And, more importantly,
you gain nothing. the "correct" table is already so simply!
do not use date, use datetime. why? it's sql92
I'm using pg_dump as a data transfer tool to input data to m$sql.
why I can not use copy and then m$sql's bcp? because m$sql
strangly ignore the difference between null and empty string
(in bcp's input format, no quotation mark used, just like pg.
however, it has no escape for null.).
so, I u
sounds intriguing. although it still use db, but because it
does not need any special db feature (table-locking is
common), it qualifys as "programmatical" solution.
however, not totally understood yet, let's see:
comparing to file locking (e.g. perl's flock)
1) locking is enforced. safer tha
either way, I do not think it's "programmatic", I assume
nobody think they are?
On Mon, 7 Feb 2000, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 01:37:21PM -0600, Ed Loehr wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > and, it seems not "programmatically at all.
> >
> > What would make
search for oid and serial or sequence, referential or foreign key
in the doc or archive of this list. there are a lot lot very good
advices.
On Fri, 4 Feb 2000, sheila bel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm new to data base design so please bare with me if my
> question is so basic..
> I'm designing a dat
cast is not necessarily extract, if you really want portablility,
use extract(), which is sql92.
select extract (day from d1) from datetime_tbl;
On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>I have one question...
>
> Why postgres returns parse error when i send
>
> select birth
in your perl script:
$dbh->{AutoCommit}=0;
you can get more info by perldoc DBI and perldoc DBD::Pg
On Thu, 9 Dec 1999, Hans Reichenecker wrote:
> I want to use Large Objects in PostgreSQL, source is a Perl-Script. But in
> unchained mode it won´t work. What else should I do to change in chai
and, generally, those low-level non-sql86/92 things should be treated with
caution.
On Fri, 3 Dec 1999, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> hi..
>
> > This is a question that could be an answer. What do y'all think about
> > using the OID to get the same functionality (unless he really needs a
> > sequen
Here is the test. I did not put it in mail because pine did not like
cut/paste. now I find a way to do it. It looks good!
the conclusion: current_timestamp is "current" -- it should be,
the looks closer than now/now() :-)
###
test3=
how about I'm a sql92 lover? :-)
the idea is to use index. but the engine only use index when it sees
"where". so, how about add "where w.tid = w.tid" to the first (or
both) select on the two sides of the except?
not tested. if work, please let us know, thanks.
Kai
On Thu, 2 Dec 1999, Adriaan
no, you won't ;-)
further testing indicates that current_stamp like current, instead of
now/now().
also, I remembered (I tried to check the archive, but failed) now() should
not be use in where clause, cos it will hurt performance.
Kai
On Wed, 1 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Ed Loehr ha
yes. good for netscape. I forgot I hate M$ ;-)
I'm going to read it word by word to systemize my sql/pg knowledge.
Another thing: the general and sql mailing lists' search do not work now.
they only return 1,2,3,... empty links, no content.
thanks!
On Wed, 1 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
now is a constant, while now() is a function. so, to me,
it should be always now unless you really need now().
what's more, in my impression, now() is not in any official
doc, it is like a rescue for now. however, in this case,
seems there is not much difference.-- oops
as for current_timesta
I can not get THE book's pdf link. Not sure whether it
is my side's irregular firewall issue. If in that case,
can it be a http link? I guess I question/request is:
seems the ftp link is broken? if not, can it be a http one?
thanks
Kai
25 matches
Mail list logo
