Re: [HACKERS] Who puts the Windows binaries on the FTP server?

2003-03-09 Thread Justin Clift
Dave Page wrote: It's rumoured that Justin Clift once said: There's more to making PostgreSQL work on Windows than just the pure packaging issues. We still have to figure out how we're going to handle stuff like needed grep, sed, etc just for PostgreSQL to run (they're required by initdb). I

Re: [HACKERS] Who puts the Windows binaries on the FTP server?

2003-03-09 Thread Andrew Dunstan
- Original Message - From: Dave Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] I thought the idea was initdb would be rewritten in C. We cannot include grep/sed etc as they're GPL... I'd be happy to do this if it hasn't been done. After a quick perusal of the script I think it would be very straightforward.

Re: [HACKERS] regression failure in CVS HEAD

2003-03-09 Thread Neil Conway
On Sat, 2003-03-08 at 21:29, Tom Lane wrote: Do you use --enable-depend when configuring? I don't, so I know that I take some risk of build errors when I do things wrong. Yeah, I did -- which I why when I reported it initially I assumed that a build problem wasn't the cause. Cheers, Neil --

Re: [HACKERS] regression failure in CVS HEAD

2003-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sat, 2003-03-08 at 21:29, Tom Lane wrote: Do you use --enable-depend when configuring? I don't, so I know that I take some risk of build errors when I do things wrong. Yeah, I did -- which I why when I reported it initially I assumed that a build

Re: [HACKERS] SQL99 ARRAY support proposal

2003-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Joe Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: The array type is determined how? I'd like this syntax better if there were a way to force the choice of array type... What about: select integer ARRAY[1,2,3]; result '{1,2,3}'::integer[] By analogy to the type 'literal' syntax?

[HACKERS] DECLARE CURSOR to become utility statement

2003-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
I'm about to change the parsetree representation of DECLARE CURSOR to look more like a standard utility statement: a DeclareCursorStmt node with a SELECT querytree dangling from it. This will make it possible to remove the cursor-specific elements of Query nodes (isPortal, isBinary), rather than

Re: [HACKERS] SQL99 ARRAY support proposal

2003-03-09 Thread Joe Conway
Tom Lane wrote: By analogy to the type 'literal' syntax? I'd prefer not to go that route, because that syntax for literals is a horrid kluge --- to keep bison from spitting up, we've had to put a bunch of nasty restrictions on the type names that can appear in such constructs. All those

Re: [HACKERS] SQL99 ARRAY support proposal

2003-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Joe Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: It would take some hackery to propagate the destination type down into the ARRAY[] before the latter's type resolution is done, but at least it'd be a quite localized hack. OK -- I'll try to make that work. I presume that in the

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] division by zero

2003-03-09 Thread Justin Clift
Hi guys, Was just looking around Google for similar reports of errors and came across this: MacOS X Server Developer Release Notes: Core OS Runtime http://www.geminisolutions.com/WebObjects_4.5/Documentation/Developer/YellowBox/ReleaseNotes/Runtime.html Looks like this is a known problem (as of

[HACKERS] test news gateway ...

2003-03-09 Thread Marc G. Fournier
---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [HACKERS] Cursors and backwards scans and SCROLL

2003-03-09 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
3. Create a runtime parameter (GUC variable) which when set causes us to assume SCROLL is present even if it's not stated. Setting this to TRUE would allow existing applications to work without modification; when it's FALSE, we'd enforce the spec behavior. The trouble with this is the TRUE

Re: [HACKERS] Cursors and backwards scans and SCROLL

2003-03-09 Thread Doug McNaught
Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'd be in favour of creating whole sets of backwards-compatibility GUC's whenever we break backwards compatibility. eg. use_72_compat = yes use_73_compat = yes That sounds like a recipe for a maintenance nightmare to me. -Doug

Re: [HACKERS] Cursors and backwards scans and SCROLL

2003-03-09 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
I'd be in favour of creating whole sets of backwards-compatibility GUC's whenever we break backwards compatibility. eg. use_72_compat = yes use_73_compat = yes That sounds like a recipe for a maintenance nightmare to me. We only have to keep them for one major version, say. eg. 7.3

Re: [HACKERS] SQL99 ARRAY support proposal

2003-03-09 Thread Joe Conway
Tom Lane wrote: I played with generalizing array functions a bit for plr and ran into some problems (which I can't specifically recall at the moment), but clearly that's the way to go. I'll start playing with your suggestions in C code, and report back for more feedback as it solidifies. It'd

Re: [HACKERS] SQL99 ARRAY support proposal

2003-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Joe Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It seems that any is not accepted as a function parameter type. You have to double-quote it. We could perhaps rename it to avoid the keyword conflict; I'd lean towards anytype if we do (anyscalar seems misleading; I'd expect that to exclude arrays). I think

Re: [HACKERS] SQL99 ARRAY support proposal

2003-03-09 Thread Hannu Krosing
Joe Conway kirjutas E, 10.03.2003 kell 05:35: CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION array_push (anyarray, anyscalar) RETURNS anyarray AS '$libdir/plr','array_push' LANGUAGE 'C'; could you make it RETURNS typeof($1) ? -- Hannu ---(end of

Re: [HACKERS] Cursors and backwards scans and SCROLL

2003-03-09 Thread Hannu Krosing
Tom Lane kirjutas P, 09.03.2003 kell 22:35: However, this is going to create backwards-compatibility issues. We have a few options for what to do: 1. Enforce the SQL spec requirement: error out if backwards fetch is done when SCROLL wasn't given. But this will surely break a lot of

Re: [HACKERS] Who puts the Windows binaries on the FTP server?

2003-03-09 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Justin Clift writes: I thought the idea was initdb would be rewritten in C. We cannot include grep/sed etc as they're GPL... I heard Peter mention that, but my email seems to be a tad spotty and I haven't come across the rest of the conversation about it. I've started rewriting some of

Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] division by zero

2003-03-09 Thread Eric B . Ridge
On Saturday, March 8, 2003, at 11:54 PM, Justin Clift wrote: Tom Lane wrote: snip 2. Consider this Apple's problem and file a bug report. Is there a good place to report errors to Apple for this kind of thing? The best place I can find is: http://developer.apple.com/bugreporter/index.html

[HACKERS] Cursors and backwards scans and SCROLL

2003-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Postgres' implementation of cursors has always had a problem with doing MOVE or FETCH backwards on complex queries. It works okay for simple seqscans and indexscans, but fails for plans involving joins, aggregates, and probably other cases. This happens because the executor routines for those

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] Cursors and backwards scans and SCROLL

2003-03-09 Thread Josh Berkus
Tom, Postgres' implementation of cursors has always had a problem with doing MOVE or FETCH backwards on complex queries. Coincidnetally enough, I was just chatting with one of my contractors yesterday about how the one thing that Transact-SQL has to offer is a really good cursor

Re: [HACKERS] Cursors and backwards scans and SCROLL

2003-03-09 Thread Rod Taylor
I'm presently leaning to #2, even though it exposes implementation details. I'm open to discussion though. Any preferences? Other ideas? How about a variable that turns on or off spec enforcement (case #1 or #2). On for 7.4, off for 7.5 the next release, and make it disappear after that.

Re: [HACKERS] Cursors and backwards scans and SCROLL

2003-03-09 Thread Tom Lane
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Enforcing spec seems like the least confusing mode to operate under, especially given it could break simply by changing the plan -- which happens automagically (seemingly random). Keep in mind though that complaints about the current bugs have been fairly

Re: [HACKERS] Cursors and backwards scans and SCROLL

2003-03-09 Thread Neil Conway
On Sun, 2003-03-09 at 16:04, Rod Taylor wrote: How about a variable that turns on or off spec enforcement (case #1 or #2). On for 7.4, off for 7.5 the next release, and make it disappear after that. Yeah, that sounds like the best solution to me. IMHO there is a case to be made for skipping