Hello.
I want to run an automatic archiving SQL script, that looks at a meta-table
containing data about the tables to be archived.
Basically, suppose I have this data in the meta-table:
table_name varchar(100)
datetime_column_name varchar(100)
archive_interval interval
Like this:
public.foo
On 23/08/2011, at 13:31, Jasen Betts wrote:
> On 2011-08-23, Herouth Maoz wrote:
>
>>EXCLUDE USING GIST ( customer_id WITH =, is_default WITH AND )
>
>
>> Basically, each customer can have several rows in this table, but only =
>> one per customer is allow
My thanks to everyone who replied.
I have decided not to implement that constraint at this time. Using a compound
type will make the system more complicated and less readable, plus requires
installing the package which is beyond vanilla PostgreSQL.
Now I have another exclusion constraint I'm th
On 22/08/2011, at 01:19, Harald Fuchs wrote:
> In article ,
> Herouth Maoz writes:
>
>> Hi,
>> I'm designing a new database. One of the table contains allowed IP ranges
>> for a customer (Fields: customer_id, from_ip, to_ip) which is intended to
>>
Hi,
I'm designing a new database. One of the table contains allowed IP ranges for a
customer (Fields: customer_id, from_ip, to_ip) which is intended to check - if
an incoming connection's originating IP number falls within the range, it is
identified as a particular customer.
Naturally, I'd l
Oliveiros Cristina wrote:
Howdy, all,
I have a problem.
I have a table which one of the fields is of type date.
I need to obtain the totals of the other fields in a by-month basis
IS there any easy way to do this using the GROUP BY or any other
construct?
Yes, use date_trunc( 'month', time
Oliveiros Cristina wrote:
Howdy, all,
I have a problem.
I have a table which one of the fields is of type date.
I need to obtain the totals of the other fields in a by-month basis
IS there any easy way to do this using the GROUP BY or any other
construct?
Yes, use date_trunc( 'month', time
Andrew Sullivan Wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 02:38:07PM +0100, Bart Degryse wrote:
> > Andrew, I think you're wrong stating that Oracle would interpret
> > NULL and empty string as equal. The Oracle databases I use (8, 9
> > and 10) certainly make a distiction between both values. Maybe
> > ea
