Re: [BUGS] upcoming 7.4 relaese: absent recode() function ?

2003-08-09 Thread Bruce Momjian 

Also, Tom, we had this item on TODO for a while, so people were using it
in the past, they would have squaked about the idea of removing it:

* -Remove Cyrillic recode support

---

Tom Lane wrote:
> Ruslan A Dautkhanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Is this mean, that PostgresSQL will not have recode() futher ?
> 
> That's right.  Use the more general character-set-conversion
> functionality, instead.
> 
>   regards, tom lane
> 
> ---(end of broadcast)---
> TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
> 

-- 
  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 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

   http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html

Re: [BUGS] Follow up: range query with timestamp returns different result with index than without (7.3.3)

2003-08-09 Thread Tom Lane 
Christian van der Leeden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The db itself (only speaking for the current 7.3.4 build),
> is not configured with enabled-integer-datetimes.

Okay ... [experiments a bit...] ah-hah, I know what happened.  Under the
hood, that value is a NaN.  Observe:

-- just to ease experimenting
tsbug=# create cast (float8 as timestamp without time zone) without function;
CREATE CAST

tsbug=# select '1.8'::float8::timestamp;
   timestamp

 2000-01-01 00:00:01.80
(1 row)

tsbug=# select 'NaN'::float8::timestamp;
timestamp
-
 4714-11--2147483625 2147483647:2147483647:2147483647 BC
(1 row)

NaNs behave funny in comparisons, which is doubtless what was fouling up
your index.  btrees assume that the trichotomy law holds :-(.

I wonder how a NaN got in there?  Anyway we probably ought to add some
defenses against it ... at least enough to ensure that timestamp indexes
stay sane.

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

   http://archives.postgresql.org

[BUGS] upcoming 7.4 relaese: absent recode() function ?

2003-08-09 Thread Ruslan A Dautkhanov 
From the latest [EMAIL PROTECTED]
message
The --enable-recode feature was removed due to its brokenness with
the IPv6 changes and an apparent lack of anyone actually using it.
Is this mean, that PostgresSQL will not have recode() futher ?
Some my programs use following form of the recode:
recode('...', 'Windows-1251', 'KOI8-R')
to convert posted users' files into my base charset KOI8-R, if the files' content have 
another charset
and save them into DB...
How can I install recode() function for 7.4 release ?



--
best regards,
Ruslan A Dautkhanov  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature