a lot of work
to do on other areas too...
To Katie: does it compile with Mingw too ?
-
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:howe;carcass.dhs.org
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
regards,
Steve Howe mailto:howe;carcass.dhs.org
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello Bruce,
Wednesday, November 6, 2002, 8:33:32 PM, you wrote:
BM Steve Howe wrote:
Hello Bruce,
Wednesday, November 6, 2002, 3:19:35 AM, you wrote:
BM I have copies of Peer Direct's (Jan's company) port of PostgreSQL to
BM Win32, and SRA's port to Win32, and permission to generate
();
version
-
PostgreSQL 7.3b3 on i386-unknown-freebsd4.4, compiled by GCC 2.95.3
(1 row)
howe=# create table a(b datetime);
ERROR: Type datetime does not exist
-
Best regards,
Steve Howe
Hello Tom,
Thursday, November 7, 2002, 1:17:00 AM, you wrote:
TL Steve Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just wondering if the datetime type was dropped on purpose from
PostgreSQL 7.3 ?
TL Yes. Ad-hoc name translations in the parser create bogosities with
TL respect to schemas --- I forget
version...
... just my thoughts, of course.
-
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:howe;carcass.dhs.org
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge
where pg_table_is_visible(p.oid);
ERROR: Cache lookup failed for relation 16905
ERROR: Cache lookup failed for relation 16905
What does that message mean ? there is not even such a relation in
pg_class.
Thanks.
--
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:howe;carcass.dhs.org
Hello Tom,
Saturday, November 2, 2002, 11:26:56 AM, you wrote:
TL Steve Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I got a weird behavior testing PostgreSQL 7.3b3. The query below was
run in a FreeBSD 4.4 system, on a fresh install and just I just had
made an initb. No classes created at all.
howe
Hello Tom,
Saturday, November 2, 2002, 5:17:29 PM, you wrote:
TL Steve Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
howe=# select p.oid, n.nspname, pg_get_userbyid(p.proowner), proname
from pg_proc as p, pg_namespace as n where pg_table_is_visible(p.oid);
However, this situation lead me into another issue
Hello Jan,
Monday, September 9, 2002, 11:26:20 AM, you wrote:
JW Steve Howe wrote:
Hello Bruce,
Friday, September 6, 2002, 9:52:18 PM, you wrote:
BM I am not any happier about it than you are. Your report is good because
BM it is the first case where returning the wrong value
to read the proposal posted to get aware of the
discussion.
Thanks.
-
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello Jan,
Monday, September 9, 2002, 11:15:47 AM, you wrote:
JW Steve Howe wrote:
Hello all,
PostgreSQL *still* has a bug where PQcmdStatus() won't return the
number of rows updated. But that is essential for applications, since
without it of course we don't know if the updates/delete
Hello Peter,
Monday, September 9, 2002, 3:41:41 PM, you wrote:
PE Steve Howe writes:
Here are the proposals for solutioning the Return proper effected
tuple count from complex commands [return] issue as seen on TODO.
Any comments ?... This is obviously open to voting and discussion.
PE We
Hello Jan,
Monday, September 9, 2002, 4:56:04 PM, you wrote:
JW Steve Howe wrote:
Hello Jan,
Monday, September 9, 2002, 11:15:47 AM, you wrote:
JW So please, proper behavior is not allways what your favorite tool
JW expects. And just because you cannot fix your tool doesn't make
Hello Bruce,
Monday, September 9, 2002, 11:13:20 PM, you wrote:
BM Steve Howe wrote:
Because the affected commands are supposed to give you back
information on what your INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE commands, not what is
making behind the scenes.
And it seems that other people in the thread agree
.
-
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
:)
-
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello Bruce,
Monday, September 9, 2002, 12:21:11 AM, you wrote:
BM Steve Howe wrote:
Hello Bruce,
But this *is* the total number of rows affected. There is no current
(defined) behavior of rows affected by the same kind of command
issued, although I agree it makes some sense.
BM Yes
Hello Bruce,
Monday, September 9, 2002, 12:22:26 AM, you wrote:
BM Steve Howe wrote:
JC return OID if sum of all replacement INSERTs in the rule inserted
JConly one row, else zero
I don't agree with this one since it would lead us to a meaningless
information... what would
imagination of PostgreSQL users has come to all
kind of uses and misuses for such a powerful feature :)
-
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all
return some information for
the client, why not doing it ? :-)
-
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http
Hello all,
Here are the proposals for solutioning the Return proper effected
tuple count from complex commands [return] issue as seen on TODO.
Any comments ?... This is obviously open to voting and discussion.
--
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
really wants a fix.
*Please* let's do it :)
Thanks.
-
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe
...
JC +1 for the version above ;-)
Which ? Yours or Tom's ? :)
-
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Hello Tom,
Saturday, September 7, 2002, 5:42:33 PM, you wrote:
TL Steve Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BM I suggest you read the TODO detail on the item and make a proposal on
BM how it _should_ work and if you can get agreement from everyone, you may
BM be able to nag someone into doing
you very much.
-
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send unregister YourEmailAddressHere
Hello Bruce,
Friday, September 6, 2002, 3:22:13 PM, you wrote:
BM Steve Howe wrote:
Hello all,
PostgreSQL *still* has a bug where PQcmdStatus() won't return the
number of rows updated. But that is essential for applications, since
without it of course we don't know if the updates/delete
is this and make a fix.
Thanks again...
-
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with PQcmdStatus() because it returns a
single integer entry only.
This was working on some previous build, wasn't it ? What was the
previous behavior ? Shouldn't the patch follow that way ?
-
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
.html.
Classic is the fork() model, and the SuperServer is the threaded
model.
-
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL
. A service can be
automatically started when the machine boots up.
-
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http
...
Best Regards,
Steve Howe
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
:)
Best Regards,
Steve Howe
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
it, and many don't even know how to do it
:(
Best Regards,
Steve Howe
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
option left ? Like arrays being referenced in relations ?
That's far from perfect, but at least would solve those issues and others
which might appear in other catalogs...
Best Regards,
Steve Howe
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading
):
Tip: Arrays are not lists; using arrays in the manner described in the
previous paragraph is often a sign of database misdesign. The array field
should generally be split off into a separate table. Tables can obviously be
searched easily.
Best Regards,
Steve Howe
pg_groupusers(grosysid integer, usesysid integer);
That makes much more sense for me, unless at least the contrib array
functions get implemented as builtins, so that we can test user groupship.
Can that be added to the TODO least ?...
Best Regards,
Steve Howe
the query, store all
rows in memory, and then pass small resultsets retrieved by FETCH commands
on the client, or does it produces and retrieves each recorset as each FETCH
command is issued ??
Best Regards,
Steve Howe
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6
Hello all,
I was in a trip and just arrived, and will do it real soon.
Best Regards,
Steve Howe
- Original Message -
From: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Hiroshi Inoue [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Steve Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2001 8:57 PM
of
this issue (ODBC applications are fine btw).
I can also do any kind of testing under Windows (and actually I'll
do it anyway). I wonder if this limitation also applies to the unix libpq
library ???
Jan, Tom, Bruce - any news on this ?
Best Regards,
Steve Howe
at the libpq sources to find out where's the error,
but I think it will take much less time to who develops it...
Best Regards,
Steve Howe
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
- Original Message -
From: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Steve Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 5:17 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again...
Steve Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It returns Error: pqReadData() -- read
Steve Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(Thinks for awhile...) You're not using PQsetnonblocking() are you,
by any chance?
No, I'm not.
Drat, another perfectly good theory down the drain :-(.
Well, we're not going to find out anymore until we discover what the
error code actually
- Original Message -
From: Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Steve Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 1:39 AM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again...
OK, I just applied a patch to add the final fixes
Hello Tom,
It returns Error: pqReadData() -- read() failed: errno=0 No error
as expected when a nil pointer is returned.
Best Regards,
Steve Howe
- Original Message -
From: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Steve Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 20
that proves libpq under windows has
this bug ???
Best Regards,
Steve Howe
- Original Message -
From: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Steve Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Large queries - again...
Steve Howe [EMAIL
to the built-in large objects API.
Does anyone have a better way of doing this ?
Best Regards,
Steve Howe
http://www.vitavoom.com
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl
ok in everything but this issue...
I guess I'll do it again, after checking the sources :)
Other people reported me they send large queries with no problems,
so I guess it should really be a problem of mine...
Best Regards,
Steve Howe
- Original Message -
From: Tom Lane
processing the request.
The connection to the server was lost. Attempting reset: Failed.
!#
Any comments ?
I need this kind of code working for a demo for ZeosDBO users...
Best Regards,
Steve Howe
to implement such a function and this should
be no trouble.
Could you please consider it ? Of course nobody wants memory
corruption in their applications and we don't like having to let those
records allocated, but we can't currently do much about it.
Thanks.
Best Regards,
Steve Howe
Capella
""Christopher Kings-Lynne"" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Reading the documentation, I see that OIDs are unique through
the
whole database.
But since OIDs are int4, does that limit the number of rows I
can
have in a
Hi folks,
Reading the documentation, I see that OIDs are unique through the
whole database.
But since OIDs are int4, does that limit the number of rows I can
have in a database to 2^32 = 4 billion ?
Best Regards,
Howe
52 matches
Mail list logo
