From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Wilcox <hungrytom(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Thom Brown <thombrown(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Configure Postgres From SQL |
Date: | 2010-07-12 20:31:30 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTimajVLYNY2U1Z3cBB2818q4Tk7-ButSAsOpO9aO@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Please don't top post.
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Tom Wilcox <hungrytom(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On 12/07/2010 19:26, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Thom Brown<thombrown(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 12 July 2010 14:50, Tom Wilcox<hungrytom(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Thom,
>>>>
>>>> I am performing update statements that are applied to a single table
>>>> that is about 96GB in size.
Much deleted, so my reply to your question is more obvious.
>>>> Any suggestions?
>>>>
>>
>> Is there a way to insert the data with these values already set when
>> you first load the db?
>>
> I could perform the settings manually (set config, restart svr, execute
> script, come back 2 days later, reset config, restart svr, execute more
> script,...), but that sort of defeats the point. My aim to have the
> simplest, automatic setup possible. Preferably completely contained within
> PostgreSQL so that all is need is a dump of the DB for a complete backup...
Not what I was talking about. Is there a way to NOT perform the
update you mention up above, by inserting the data with the values
already set properly. I don't see why that can't be incorporated into
your solution, but I'm not sure how exactly your solution is working.
Note that customer requirement that it all be in SQL is a bit idiotic.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Kellerer | 2010-07-12 21:29:52 | Testing 9.0beta3 and pg_upgrade |
Previous Message | Tom Wilcox | 2010-07-12 20:20:21 | Re: Configure Postgres From SQL |