Thu Jan 26 17:34:13 PST 2012
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] timestamp in unique key
- Next message: [Slony1-general] Release candidate 2 for Slony 2.0.8 and Slony 2.1.1
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wed, 25 Jan 2012, Sergey Suleymanov wrote: If my memory serves me right, Postgresql stores more bits of precision for timestamps than get printed as text. So a timestamp converted to text and added back into the database might not always return true on the equal operator. I can't think of a work around for slony that doesn't involve adding another column to your table. Steve > > Hello everybody, I need help. > > let's to say, there is a table: > > \d molot.sens_data > ... > device_id | integer | not null > time_stamp | timestamp with time zone | not null > ... > Indexes: > "sens_data_device_id_key" UNIQUE, btree (device_id, time_stamp) > > slonik script: > > create set (id=3, origin=1); > set add table ( set id=3, origin=1, id=32, > fully qualified name = 'molot.sens_data', > key = 'sens_data_device_id_key'); > subscribe set ... > > Everything is ok, copy_set went well, replication has begun. Inserts are > successfully, but updates and deletes are not. > > Append "serial primary key" column really don't want as long (table is > about 250 mil records). Is there any other way? > > > slony1 - 1.2.21, Pg - 8.4.9 > > -- > Sergey Suleymanov > _______________________________________________ > Slony1-general mailing list > Slony1-general at lists.slony.info > http://lists.slony.info/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general >
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] timestamp in unique key
- Next message: [Slony1-general] Release candidate 2 for Slony 2.0.8 and Slony 2.1.1
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Slony1-general mailing list