Re: [HACKERS] Big Test Environment Feature

2002-06-14 Thread Bill Cunningham
Matthew Tedder wrote: >Question: > >How feasible would it be to create this functionality in PostgreSQL: > >One creates a test version of a database that initially consists of >read-links to the production version of the same database. Any code he/she >then writes that reads from a table r

Re: [HACKERS] Schemas: status report, call for developers

2002-04-30 Thread Bill Cunningham
Tom Lane wrote: >Bill Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>I would think this should produce the following: >> > >>test=# \d mytab >>Table "bar.mytab" >> Column | Type | Modifiers >>+-+--- >

Re: [HACKERS] Schemas: status report, call for developers

2002-04-30 Thread Bill Cunningham
| Type | Modifiers +-+--- f1 | text| f1 | integer | Table "foo.mytab" Column | Type | Modifiers +-+--- f2 | text| f3 | integer | What do you think? - Bill Cunningham ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Re: [HACKERS] Index Scans become Seq Scans after VACUUM ANALYSE

2002-04-17 Thread Bill Cunningham
Tom Lane wrote: >mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>That is the difference, in another post Tom said he could not get >>excited about 10.9 second execution time over a 7.96 execution >>time. Damn!!! I would. That is wrong. >> > >Sure. Show us how to make the planner's estimates 2x more accurate