On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 11:22:22AM -0500, Kenneth Hutchinson wrote:
> UPDATE t_summary
> SETavailability = 7
> WHERE oid = 28245084
>
> When this query is executed (within a function or without) the database
> will simply hang. If the UPDATE is turned into a SELECT, the query
> works jus
If I write a rule, I can easily see it by doing
select * from pg_rules;
and I also get to see all the rules I have created for my database. How can I
easily get to see the definition of a user defined function please? I've
searched through the online manual but failed to find the answer.
TAI
On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 20:29:40 +0300,
"Milen A. Radev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I would like to get all employees, who speak two specified languages
> (say german and french). The following query gives me that, bu I don't
> like it (see for yourself):
>
>
> SELECT
> ?.employee_id,
>
Hilary Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How can I easily get to see the definition of a user defined function
> please?
Look in pg_proc.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FA
> I kown I can use pg_dump to perform that "back up" but I wanted to
> test performences.
pg_dump does the same.. if you same custom it makes binary (WITH BINARY)
but with compression.
Performance?
1. TOP: inserte into select
2. TOP: copy / pg_restore with uncompressed binary
3. TOP: copy /
Tom
Many thanks. Suppose I now want to know if there are any user defined
functions set up in my database? I was rather hoping I could do something
simple like
\df
to get a list of **user** defined functions rather as \dt gives me a list of my
tables and not the complete list of all the sys
Hilary Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Many thanks. Suppose I now want to know if there are any user defined
> functions set up in my database? I was rather hoping I could do something
> simple like
> \df
> to get a list of **user** defined functions rather as \dt gives me a list of
> my
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am 22.09.2005 um 22:26 schrieb Daryl Richter:
Axel Rau wrote:
Thank you for responding, Daryl,
Am 22.09.2005 um 16:45 schrieb Daryl Richter:
Axel Rau wrote:
Hi SQLers,
I have a fk from address to network and try to update the foreign
key colum
--- Michael Fuhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 06:56:36PM -0700, Matthew
> Peter wrote:
> > How is it possible to delete an item from a single
> > dimension varchar[] array? Lets say it has the
> values
> > {1,2,3,4,5,6}... how do i delete at position [4]?
>
> I'm not sur
On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 06:31:17PM +0200, Axel Rau wrote:
> Networks change during time, being diveded or aggregated or you just
> enter wrong data during insert.
Have you considered using a CHECK constraint and/or a trigger to
ensure that the network in the network column contains the address
in
Axel Rau wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am 22.09.2005 um 22:26 schrieb Daryl Richter:
Axel Rau wrote:
Thank you for responding, Daryl,
Am 22.09.2005 um 16:45 schrieb Daryl Richter:
Axel Rau wrote:
Hi SQLers,
I have a fk from address to network and try to update the
On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 10:02:44AM -0700, Matthew Peter wrote:
> --- Michael Fuhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > test=> UPDATE foo SET a = a[1:3] || a[5:6];
>
> I sure hope there is a better way :) There must be an
> easy, native way to interface with arrays.
Hoping a thing is true doesn't mean it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am 23.09.2005 um 19:32 schrieb Michael Fuhr:
On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 06:31:17PM +0200, Axel Rau wrote:
Networks change during time, being diveded or aggregated or you just
enter wrong data during insert.
Have you considered using a CHECK constra
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am 23.09.2005 um 20:43 schrieb Daryl Richter:
[snip]
I think that I now see what the problem is --> Why do you have a
network table at all? It's redundant.
There are more attributes and fks, I didn't mention to simplify. The
schema is events ->
--- Michael Fuhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 10:02:44AM -0700, Matthew
> Peter wrote:
> > --- Michael Fuhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > test=> UPDATE foo SET a = a[1:3] || a[5:6];
> >
> > I sure hope there is a better way :) There must be
> an
> > easy, native way to i
Greetings,
What advantages I lose, when using dump-truncate-restore (table
or whole DB) instead of performing VACUUM FULL ?
In both cases I have no access to data, but first is much faster
(by subjective estimate).
Thank you,
Ilya A. Kovalenko (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
16 matches
Mail list logo