of other queries that do this as well, but this is the
first one that I noticed. This database schema and query works fine
version 8.1.4.
--
//\\
|| D. Hageman
| dba
term_032 | schedule_seq | sequence | t | dba
term_032 | schedule_student | table| t | dba
term_032 | schedule_student_seq | sequence | t | dba
--
//====\\
|| D. Hageman
I didn't see this make it to the list. I thought I would try again.
--
//\\
|| D. Hageman<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ||
\\//
-- Forwar
the
layout/structure/nature of the database. If you can't see all your
namespaces that you set in your search_path then it could distort ones
understanding of the database.
--
//\\
|| D. Hageman<[EMAIL P
rough Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
--
//\\
|| D. Hageman<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ||
\\//
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, Alex Pilosov wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, D. Hageman wrote:
>
> > When you need data that is specific to a thread you use a TSD (Thread
> > Specific Data).
> Which Linux does not support with a vengeance, to my knowledge.
I am not sure what that m
#x27;t
(shouldn't is probably a better word) really access anything you don't have
an address for. Threads just makes it easier to share if you want to.
Also, see my other e-mail to the list concerning TSDs.
--
//=
ing the same code with the
bug in it - and only 1 in 5 die - is still 4 copies of buggy code running
on your system ;-)
> (Actually, though, Postgres is already vulnerable to erratic behaviour
> because any backend process can corrupt the shared buffer pool.)
I appreciate your total
le uses threads doesn't it or at least it has a
single processor and multi-processor version last time I knew ... which do
they claim is better? (Not saying that Oracle's proclimation of what is
good and what is not matters, but it is good for another view point).
--
//==
On 26 Sep 2001, Doug McNaught wrote:
> "D. Hageman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The plan for the new spinlocks does look like it has some potential. My
> > only comment in regards to permformance when we start looking at SMP
> > machines is
it done in a day.
>
> Comments anyone?
>
> regards, tom lane
--
//========\\
|| D. Hageman<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ||
\\//
--
ng a
hand with setup and what not (though they will have to speak for
themselves on this issues).
--
//========\\
|| D. Hageman<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ||
\\
12 matches
Mail list logo
