Mailing lists [pgsql-general]

22 July 2001

• 01:36   Re: Performance impact of NULLs and variable length fields Martijn van Oosterhout
• 01:42   Re: Microsoft SQL Server Replication Joshua Jore
• 02:06   How Postgresql Compares... Count(*) and others Mark kirkwood
• 02:20   Re: Re: Examples of using bytea type Bruce Momjian
• 02:50   Re: How Postgresql Compares... Count(*) and others Tom Lane
• 09:39   Re: VACUUM ANALYZE Ben-Nes Michael
• 10:01   Re: VACUUM ANALYZE Ben-Nes Michael
• 11:36   Planner estimates cost of 'like' a lot lower than '='?? Mats Lofkvist
• 12:48   Re: Planner estimates cost of 'like' a lot lower than '='?? Buddy Lee Haystack
• 13:37   Re: How Postgresql Compares... Count(*) and others Bruno Wolff III
• 14:01   Re: Planner estimates cost of 'like' a lot lower than '='?? Mats Lofkvist
• 14:39   Re: VACUUM ANALYZE Tom Lane
• 15:13   Re: Planner estimates cost of 'like' a lot lower than '='?? Tom Lane
• 16:31   Re: SQL Regular Expression Question missive@frontiernet.net (Lee Harr)
• 17:36   Re: Planner estimates cost of 'like' a lot lower than '='?? Mats Lofkvist
• 18:29   Re: Planner estimates cost of 'like' a lot lower than '='?? Tom Lane
• 18:44   Re: Planner estimates cost of 'like' a lot lower than '='?? Tom Lane
• 19:04   Re: SQL Regular Expression Question Joel Burton
• 19:16   Re: Planner estimates cost of 'like' a lot lower than '='?? Mats Lofkvist
• 20:17   Re: Planner estimates cost of 'like' a lot lower than '='?? Mats Lofkvist
• 21:01   psql on red hat 7.1 newsreader@mediaone.net
• 21:14   Re: Planner estimates cost of 'like' a lot lower than '='?? Tom Lane
• 21:29   Re: psql on red hat 7.1 teg@redhat.com (Trond Eivind Glomsrød)
• 21:45   Re: Planner estimates cost of 'like' a lot lower than '='?? Mats Lofkvist
• 22:01   Re: Planner estimates cost of 'like' a lot lower than '='?? Tom Lane
• 22:06   Re: Copy and serial type problem missive@frontiernet.net (Lee Harr)
• 23:30   Re: psql on red hat 7.1 Justin Clift