| Thread | Last Post | Replies |
|
| left join on a view takes significantly more time. | 01 Apr 2004 00:49 GMT | 1 |
I'm facing a wired problem. When I left join two tables PostgreSQL is able to do it fast using the corresponding indices, However, if I define a simple view (to format the data) on one of the tables, the left join does not use the indices. Is something wrong here?
|
| Does an index get create for a Primary Key? | 31 Mar 2004 23:52 GMT | 1 |
Does an index get created for a Primary Key or is it just a constraint? Thanks, ThomasLL _________________________________________________________________
|
| SQL Spec Compliance Questions | 31 Mar 2004 23:41 GMT | 2 |
Folks, Just got this "do we support it" questionnaire from a signficant commercial entity vaguely interested in supporting PostrgreSQL. Since I'm often foggy on the differences between the SQL99 and SQL92 spec definitions of things, I
|
| LIKE and Locale | 31 Mar 2004 23:30 GMT | 3 |
I'm a little frustrated select * from mytable where mystring = 'foo'; Uses an index select * from mytable where mystring like 'foo';
|
| Problem with foreign keys and locking | 31 Mar 2004 22:47 GMT | 1 |
I know this issue has beeen brought up before (since 2000 infact), but lots has changed with postgresql since then. I have followed this issue through versions 7.2, 7.3, and now 7.4. I'm talking about the
|
| Question about rtrees (overleft replacing left in nodes) | 31 Mar 2004 22:36 GMT | 10 |
Hello, I'm rather confused about the logic of something in the rtree code, perhaps someone can provide some insight here. Without loss of generality I'll use intervals on R (real number line) below, but this would apply to
|
| PL/pgSQL | 31 Mar 2004 20:23 GMT | 1 |
Below is the info from the on-line docs for 7.4.2. Can someone tell me how to hook into the error mechanism to notice that this happens. Like the doc says you can. I want to do something special in PL/pgSQL if I notice an error has been
|
| How can I change type of column | 31 Mar 2004 18:00 GMT | 2 |
Can I change type of column with alter table command? For instance if I have a table t1 and column c1 which is defined as decimal(18, 2) and I want to change it into decimal(18, 3) in MS SQL server I can write:
|
| TODO list | 31 Mar 2004 16:55 GMT | 6 |
2 things. I submitted a patch for this 5 months ago, which is still waiting to be merged (hope it hasn't bitrotted in the meantime): . Allow log lines to include session-level information, like database
|
| pg_dump end comment | 31 Mar 2004 16:53 GMT | 8 |
This might seem a bit silly, but is there any chance we could add a comment at the end of pg_dump text output that says '-- End of dump'? Would make it useful for checking that you actually have a complete dump... Chris
|
| Why is pg_dump using INSERTs instead of COPYs? | 31 Mar 2004 16:23 GMT | 3 |
I've got a database running PostgreSQL 7.4.2 on Fedora Linux. In the past, pg_dump would dump database backups using COPY to restore the data. This time it appears that it has individual INSERTs for each tuple. Perhaps I'm missing this in the latest documentation, but I
|
| Warings in Log: could not resolve "localhost": host nor service provided, or not known | 31 Mar 2004 16:22 GMT | 1 |
I built PostgreSQL 7.4.2 on HPUX IPF platform. It works fine. But when I start the postmaster, I got the following LOG message: LOG: could not resolve "localhost": host nor service provided, or not known $ postmaster -D /var/opt/iexpress/postgresql &
|
| Slow IN query | 31 Mar 2004 16:17 GMT | 1 |
Using an OR or IN query seems to be orders of magnitudes slower than running a query twice. There is an unique index on 'id' and an index on 'model_ns, model'. The number of row returned is less than 800. Everything is vacuumed and analyzed. Running on 7.4.1. Perhaps this
|
| plpgsql vs. SQL in stored procedures | 31 Mar 2004 13:06 GMT | 3 |
Is there a way to declare variables and use IF in plain SQL, not in plpgsql inside stored procedures?
|
| PG 7.2.4 and waiting backends | 31 Mar 2004 06:46 GMT | 2 |
Currently experiencing a problem, apparently triggered by vacuumdb -a -f which results in all backends (including the vacuum) becoming locked with a status of 'waiting'. The intention is to migrate the DB from 7.2 to a later version. The
|