Joseph Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have a table with a decent number of rows (let's say for example a
billion rows). I am trying to construct a graph that displays the
distribution of that data. However, I don't want to read in the
complete data set (as reading a billion rows
Hello List,
I am writing two stored procedure which alternatively returns the dayhours and
nighthours of two times. (nighthours are considered between 00:00 and 06:00).
As an example here is the getdayhours function:
Need help on this problem. I've created two functions. The function
should perform a few sql processes. The problem is I got different
results when I call the function and when I manually run the sql command.
I'm using postgresql 7.4.2.
The two functions involved are
CREATE TABLE
Does any one have any reasonably simple application example that uses
or parses the
HeapTuple (PointerGetDatum(rettuple) ) returned by 'c' trigger function?
Also, what is the syntax to parse the HeapTuple within the trigger function?
thanks
---(end of
Stijn Vanroye [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I can't seem to find a way to substract two time values (or
timestamp values) and get a numeric/float value. I always get the
INTERVAL datatype.
extract(epoch from interval) may help.
regards, tom lane
Indeed. I think I
On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 10:11:57 +0200,
Stijn Vanroye [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The working of the functions is not the problem, but the return type is. I can't
seem to find a way to substract two time values (or timestamp values) and get a
numeric/float value. I always get the INTERVAL
Is it possible to create a select rule that returns results depending on a
where clause in the original select statement?
For Example (oversimplified):
CREATE TABLE one (data int);
CREATE TABLE two (data int);
I make the query:
SELECT data FROM number WHERE type=1;
If the type is 1 (type=1) I
On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 21:32:47 -0700,
Christopher Dedels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it possible to create a select rule that returns results depending on a
where clause in the original select statement?
For Example (oversimplified):
CREATE TABLE one (data int);
CREATE TABLE two (data
Khairul,
Need help on this problem. I've created two functions. The function
should perform a few sql processes. The problem is I got different
results when I call the function and when I manually run the sql command.
I'm using postgresql 7.4.2.
Hmmm ... that's odd. I remember getting this
Stijn Vanroye [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I can't seem to find a way to substract two time values (or
timestamp values) and get a numeric/float value. I always get the
INTERVAL datatype.
extract(epoch from interval) may help.
regards, tom lane
On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 09:16:04 -0700,
Christopher Dedels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruno,
Thanks for the response.
You should keep the discussion copied to the list as long as it is on topic.
That way other people can help out.
I was wondering if I was possible to union the tables if
Good morning,afternoon, and
eveningEveryone,
My research into PostgreSQL documentation has yet
to yeild any information about PostgreSQL's support of ANSI SQL-99 syntax, and
in particular, the "WITH" clause - which if I understand correctly,allows
recursive joins in simple syntax without
Good morning,afternoon, and evening Everyone,
My research into PostgreSQL documentation has yet to yeild any information about
PostgreSQL's support of ANSI SQL-99 syntax, and in particular, the WITH clause -
which if I understand correctly, allows recursive joins in simple syntax without
On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 15:37:41 -0400,
Rein Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My research into PostgreSQL documentation has yet to yeild any information about
PostgreSQL's support of ANSI SQL-99 syntax, and in particular, the WITH clause -
which if I understand correctly, allows recursive
Bruno Wolff III [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Rein Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As you may have guessed, I hope PostgreSQL currently supports the
WITH clause syntax or, will at least support it imminently.
Postgres doesn't currently support that. Someone was working on it a while
back, but
15 matches
Mail list logo
