Petr Splichal ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 2
The lower the number the more severe it is.
Short Description
ORDER BY on INTERSECT
Long Description
I was not able to make an ORDER BY on INTERSECT of two SELECTs.
Instead I got this error:
] get_sortgroupclause_tle: ORDER/GR
Actually Peter did a patch for this fairly recently I
believe. I haven't grabbed CVS recently enough to know
if it got committed. There's a related question of what
permissions you need to follow referential actions (currently
it's the same permission as if you were doing the implied
statement
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> SELECT id from questions where id < 40 intersect select id from questions where id >
>20 order by id;
> ERROR: get_sortgroupclause_tle: ORDER/GROUP BY expression not found in targetlist
Already fixed in current sources, but thanks for the report.
Kensaku MASUDA ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 2
The lower the number the more severe it is.
Short Description
ResultSet.getTimestamp() was broken
Long Description
This report is same as #8. And collect format string is here.
from
"-MM-dd HH:mm:ss.zzz"
t
Kensaku MASUDA ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 2
The lower the number the more severe it is.
Short Description
ResultSet.getTimestamp() was broken.
Long Description
About #70, It can not cover all cases. So restored data are presented by original
format string.
Best way
Well, actually the question of whether failing referential actions
due to permission deficits of the user doing the delete/update
on the pk table is a bug or feature still stands. It would be
fairly trivial to extend Peter's patch to effectively setuid on
the actions, but the question is whether
Oh, OK. I will forget it.
>
> Actually Peter did a patch for this fairly recently I
> believe. I haven't grabbed CVS recently enough to know
> if it got committed. There's a related question of what
> permissions you need to follow referential actions (currently
> it's the same permission as
