hi, i'm new in this copmmunity. i usualy use ms sql 2000 to develope Database in every
project. But since Microsoft make an office in my city, there is big difficulties to
get a copy of ms sql 2000 cd in my city (illegally hehehe). i think postgresql more
powerfull than ms sql 2000, but i didnt
Rory Campbell-Lange wrote:
Essentially the call (as defined below) asks for an update and adds a
LIMIT parameter on the end of the UPDATE. (eg update where x=1 limit 1).
Postgres doesn't like this and I assume it isn't SQL standards
compliant and need to refer to this in my bug report.
As far as
Rory Campbell-Lange writes:
I've downloaded the sql document archives from
postgresql.org/postgresql/doc/sql but it isn't clear to me how to
discern what is legal in an UPDATE statement.
Certainly LIMIT is not. Although LIMIT is a key word in the SQL standard,
it isn't used for anything, so
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 20:06:56 +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
I had excess of 300 spam
mails to delete between friday night 9PM and monday morning 11AM. Usually that
is limited to 10-15 over week end.
Is that all? Lucky you.
- --
jimoe at
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 06:49:56PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Hadn't thought of it that way ... but, what would prompt someone to
upgrade, then use something like erserver to roll back? All I can think
of is that the upgrade caused alot of problems with the application
itself, but in a
I don't know why you want to list a NULL with no other info, but here
you go:
SELECT coords FROM dlg_control WHERE coords IS NULL LIMIT 1;
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anybody know how to detect a NULL in a geometric box type?
When I execute the following sql statement (coords is a box type)
On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 04:54:30PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
Sure, I've seen expensive h/e flake out. It was the 8 or 9 times
in a row that confused me.
You need to talk to people who've had Sun Ex500s with the UltraSPARC
II built with the IBM e-cache modules. Ask 'em about the reliability
of
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
I'm not going to rehash the arguments I have made before; they are all
archived. Suffice to say you are simply wrong. The number of
complaints over the years shows that there IS a need.
I at no point
Richard Welty wrote:
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 09:49:32 -0600 (MDT) scott.marlowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Ron Johnson wrote:
What's a Saturn IV? Do you mean the Saturn V?
http://www.aviation-central.com/space/usm50.htm
actually, may i suggeset
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
Howard Lowndes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm working psql v7.2.2 to postmaster v7.2.2 and want to use the
\lo_import function.
The psql manual says that the syntax is \lo_import 'filename' 'comment'
This loads the blob OK and returns the loid but the
Also, to be blunt: if pg_dump still has problems after all the years
we've put into it, what makes you think that in-place upgrade will
magically work reliably?
Fair enough. On another front then... would all this energy we are
talking about with pg_upgrade
be better spent on
Jan Wieck wrote:
Richard Welty wrote:
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 09:49:32 -0600 (MDT) scott.marlowe
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Ron Johnson wrote:
What's a Saturn IV? Do you mean the Saturn V?
http://www.aviation-central.com/space/usm50.htm
actually, may i suggeset
Hello,
All due respect to everyone but political correctness is essentially
the living with the feeling that you are a politician.
I am not a politician, neither is Command Prompt. We are a business, we
have opinions, views and a sense of humor.
These traits may or may not be representative of
Tom Lane wrote:
Kaare Rasmussen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Not sure about your position here. You claimed that it would be a good idea to
freeze the on disk format for at least a couple of versions.
I said it would be a good idea to freeze the format of user tables (and
indexes) across multiple
Ron Johnson wrote:
Who's want to build a 40-year-old rocket?
You'd be surpised. Some plans for replacing the shuttle call for going back to Saturn
V's. NASA went with the shuttle design in the first place because resusable was supposed
to be cheaper, but it hasn't turned out that way.
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Fair enough. On another front then... would all this energy we are
talking about with pg_upgrade
be better spent on pg_dump/pg_dumpall/pg_restore?
Well, we need to work on pg_dump too. But I don't foresee it ever
getting fast enough to satisfy the
[this is all horribly offtopic, but since the listadmins haven't commenced
summary execution yet... i have a suggestion to make about offtopic
discussions, which appears at the end]
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 19:12:37 -0400 Joseph Shraibman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
Who's want to
Is it right for postgres to accept a foreign key constraint when the
type of the field is not the same as that of the foreign key?
For example:
# Create table a (id int primary key);
NOTICE: CREATE TABLE / PRIMARY KEY will create implicit index 'a_pkey'
for table 'a'
CREATE TABLE
# Create
Hi Sreedhar
Try it with
...
catalogid) values ('KICKIN''BACK.SDS', 13803564 , ' OpenOffice.org 5.0
Chart
...
Use a second ' to escape ' instead of a backslash.
Greetings
Conni
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, Jean-Christian Imbeault wrote:
Is it right for postgres to accept a foreign key constraint when the
type of the field is not the same as that of the foreign key?
IIRC in SQL92 it's said that they need to be the same type, but in SQL99
it says that the two types must be
Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, Jean-Christian Imbeault wrote:
Is it right for postgres to accept a foreign key constraint when the
type of the field is not the same as that of the foreign key?
IIRC in SQL92 it's said that they need to be the same type, but in
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, Stephan Szabo wrote:
it says that the two types must be comparable. We basically implement the
latter, basically using the existance of a usable equality operator as the
determination of comparable.
Is it possible to drop the equality operator when one have FK that needs
On Sep 21, 2003, at 9:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
That makes no sense at all --- AFAICT there were *no* darwin or ppc
specific changes between 7.3.2 and 7.3.4. Can you double check?
Not really knowing what I'm doing, I took s_lock.c and s_lock.h from
7.4beta3, copied 'em into the 7.3.4 src tree, and
23 matches
Mail list logo
