Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >It's different because we know why we need that one: we understand the > >cause of the behavior and we therefore can have some confidence that the > >kluge will fix it (or not, as the case may be). I have zero confidence > >in looping five times around an "ln" call. > > > > > > > > Even if we don't do that can we *please* put in something that detects > the error, and tells the user what they will have to do to fix it? > Failing in a situation which we know we can detect and not telling the > user is intolerable, IMNSHO.
Agreed. At a minium we have to throw an error and tell them to run it again. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
