Re: [GENERAL] A counter argument about DISTINCT and GROUP BY in PostgreSQL

2008-01-16 Thread dterrors
On Jan 4, 11:48 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory Stark) wrote: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I've just spent a few hours searching and reading about the postgres > > way of selecting distinct records. I understand the points made about > > the ORDER BY limitation of DISTINCT ON, and the abiguity

[GENERAL] A counter argument about DISTINCT and GROUP BY in PostgreSQL

2008-01-04 Thread dterrors
I've just spent a few hours searching and reading about the postgres way of selecting distinct records. I understand the points made about the ORDER BY limitation of DISTINCT ON, and the abiguity of GROUP BY, but I think there's a (simple, common) case that have been missed in the discussion. Her

[GENERAL] Is there PHP mysql_real_escape_string for postgresql?

2007-12-20 Thread dterrors
In php is there a postgresql version of mysql_real_escape_string() ? ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Re: [GENERAL] It's time to support GRANT SELECT,UPDATE,...,...,... ON database.* to username

2007-10-04 Thread dterrors
On Oct 2, 3:14 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeff Davis) wrote: > A "wakeup call" might be justified if: > (1) it's on -advocacy (after all, the primary threat in his email is > that we would lose users...) > (2) it's good advocacy, i.e. not rude, insulting, demanding, or vulgar > Good point, I apologiz

Re: [GENERAL] It's time to support GRANT SELECT,UPDATE,...,...,... ON database.* to username

2007-10-04 Thread dterrors
On Oct 2, 12:06 pm, Chris Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The trouble is that "GRANT ON *.*" seems to be a lazy shortcut for > someone who *thinks* they're trying to secure their system, but that > would rather say "well, everything" as opposed to looking at things > properly. > > That is, if y

[GENERAL] It's time to support GRANT SELECT,UPDATE,...,...,... ON database.* to username

2007-10-01 Thread dterrors
I don't care if it's part of the SQL standard or not. I don't care if oracle does it or not. You're losing mysql converts as they go through the tutorial and get to this point. Or worse, they just "grant all" because it's easier, thus causing security holes. User friendliness matters. There's l

Re: [GENERAL] Are these two creation commands functionally identical?

2007-08-17 Thread dterrors
On Aug 11, 5:21 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ragnar) wrote: > no these 2 are not fuctionally identical, because the second one > does not have a NOT NULL constraint on the foreign keys, > allowing you to insert: > INSERT INTO sales (saleid,userid,parent_saleid) > VALUES (100,null,100); > OK thank yo

[GENERAL] Are these two creation commands functionally identical?

2007-08-09 Thread dterrors
I want to to know if these two are functionally equivalent. Is this: Create table "users" ( "userid" BigSerial NOT NULL, "name" Varchar(20), primary key ("userid") ) Without Oids; Create table "sales" ( "saleid" BigSerial NOT NULL, "userid" Bigint NOT NULL,