Hi all,
I've found a bit strange thing on the INTEGER range in the official manual.
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/interactive/datatype-numeric.html
According to the official manual, the INTEGER range is "-2147483648 to
+2147483647".
However, my example in below shows that "-2147483648" is
2010/6/22 Satoshi Nagayasu :
> Hi all,
>
> I've found a bit strange thing on the INTEGER range in the official manual.
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/interactive/datatype-numeric.html
>
> According to the official manual, the INTEGER range is "-2147483648 to
> +2147483647".
> However, my e
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 10:27 AM, Satoshi Nagayasu
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've found a bit strange thing on the INTEGER range in the official manual.
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/interactive/datatype-numeric.html
>
> According to the official manual, the INTEGER range is "-2147483648 to
>
On 22 June 2010 09:44, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 10:27 AM, Satoshi Nagayasu
> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've found a bit strange thing on the INTEGER range in the official manual.
>>
>> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/interactive/datatype-numeric.html
>>
>> According to th
On 22 June 2010 09:59, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:
> Magnus,
>
> Thanks for your advice. I've understood how it happens.
>
> However, it looks tricky and difficult to understand,
> so I hope that the message could be more understandable
> as Thom mentioned.
>
> Regards,
>
This does appear to be a got
On 22 June 2010 10:46, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 22 June 2010 09:59, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:
>> Magnus,
>>
>> Thanks for your advice. I've understood how it happens.
>>
>> However, it looks tricky and difficult to understand,
>> so I hope that the message could be more understandable
>> as Thom ment
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 11:42:03PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I did some editing of the Hot Standby docs tonight; PFA a proposed patch.
>
> Comments?
In general, +1
> +When the parameter is set to true on a
> +standby server, it will begin accepting connections once the recovery has
>
Thom,
Actually, come to think of it, shouldn't we have a gotchas page on the wiki?
I agree with that it should be described in some tech document,
but I don't have any good idea where/how it should be written.
Basically, it's a parser issue, but app developers may meet it
on their type castin
Magnus,
Thanks for your advice. I've understood how it happens.
However, it looks tricky and difficult to understand,
so I hope that the message could be more understandable
as Thom mentioned.
Regards,
On 2010/06/22 17:48, Thom Brown wrote:
On 22 June 2010 09:44, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On T
I have updated the pg_ctl docs to explain server output behavior
differences on win32 and non-win32 platforms; applied patch attached.
--
Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ None of us is going to be here forever. +
I
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Joshua Tolley wrote:
> I'm not sure it's worth pointing out that the database might still use temp
> files. It seems an unnecessary level of detail. I realize you're probably
> putting it here because you've edited that bit out of the docs elsewhere, but
> I still
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 02:24:55PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Joshua Tolley wrote:
> >> - Queries executed on the standby will be correct with regard to the
> >> transactions
> >> - that had been recovered at the start of the query, or start of first
> >>
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 09:36:30AM +0100, Thom Brown wrote:
> 2010/6/22 Satoshi Nagayasu :
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I've found a bit strange thing on the INTEGER range in the official manual.
> >
> > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/interactive/datatype-numeric.html
> >
> > According to the official m
On 23 June 2010 00:07, David Fetter wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 09:36:30AM +0100, Thom Brown wrote:
>> 2010/6/22 Satoshi Nagayasu :
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I've found a bit strange thing on the INTEGER range in the official manual.
>> >
>> > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/interactive/datat
Thom Brown writes:
> Is that the right behaviour though? Shouldn't the signed value reach
> the cast step rather than the absolute value? Or maybe Postgres could
> implicitly accept -12345::integer to be (-12345)::integer. Is there a
> blocking reason as to why it must work this way?
Yes. The
15 matches
Mail list logo