2009/7/3 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
The application stamps comments with the
community login of the person who left them, but the import stamped
them with names instead. This is actually of some significance, since
the app will allow you to edit your own comments but not those of
2009/7/4 Greg Stark gsst...@mit.edu:
On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 10:31 PM, Greg Starkgsst...@mit.edu wrote:
It's pretty hard to guess where your bug is sitting here with no code
and no idea even what you've done to trigger it.
At a guess there someplace you haven't detoasted a datum that had to
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:22 PM, Robert Haasrobertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm finding myself unable to follow all the terminology on this thead.
What's dimension reduction? What's PCA?
[snip]
Imagine you have a dataset with two variables, say height in inches
and age in years. For tue purpose
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
- shared_buffers = 128MB
What happens with a larger value for shared_buffers?
COPY performance of PostgreSQL 8.4.0 was a little bit better than
PostgreSQL 8.3.0 when shared_buffes was 1GB.
My server has 2GB RAM.
* Shared_buffers = 1GB
-
Here's a copy of the merge-append patch that I sent months ago merged up to
head. I haven't really added any additional functionality since then.
Heikki suggested I separate the Append and MergeAppend nodes into two executor
nodes. I had that half done in my tree but looking it over it leads to
Here's a copy of the merge-append patch that I sent months ago merged up to
head. I haven't really added any additional functionality since then.
Heikki suggested I separate the Append and MergeAppend nodes into two executor
nodes. I had that half done in my tree but looking it over it leads to
On Jul 5, 2009, at 10:02 AM, Gregory Stark st...@mit.edu wrote:
Here's a copy of the merge-append patch that I sent months ago
merged up to
head. I haven't really added any additional functionality since then.
Heikki suggested I separate the Append and MergeAppend nodes into
two executor
Hi,
Le 31 mai 09 à 18:21, Tom Lane a écrit :
The reason this doesn't work is that SPI can only be invoked inside a
transaction, and you're not inside one when a library is being
preloaded.
Please find attached a little little patch which run
process_local_preload_libraries from within a
Dimitri Fontaine dfonta...@hi-media.com writes:
Please find attached a little little patch which run
process_local_preload_libraries from within a transaction.
This is inevitably going to break other people's code. Put the
transaction wrapper in your own stuff if you have to have it.
I am testing some of my queries with 8.4 and find some performance decline.
8.4 always execute functions in this subquery, even if result do not need it.
8.3 correctly optimize this and do not execute this functions, here is example:
create function foo() returns int language sql as $$ select
Sergey Burladyan eshkin...@gmail.com writes:
Thinks !
Th_a_nks ! :)
--
Sergey Burladyan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 10:34 PM, Robert Haasrobertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jul 5, 2009, at 10:02 AM, Gregory Stark st...@mit.edu wrote:
Here's a copy of the merge-append patch that I sent months ago merged up to
head. I haven't really added any additional functionality since then.
Can you
This is a follow up to my old proposal here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-06/msg00404.php
Top pointed out a few problems here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-06/msg00427.php
Here are my updated answers:
1. Not a problem with the new design, which checks
Hello!
I got into a situation I don't know how the get out ..
First, I could not access to my biggest database in postgre anymore
because it suddenly gave the error (after long time working with no
problems)
ERROR: could not open relation 1663/392281/530087: No such file
or directory
14 matches
Mail list logo
