Giles Lean [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
ALTER TABLE FKTABLE ADD FOREIGN KEY(ftest1) references
pktable(ptest1);
NOTICE: ALTER TABLE will create implicit trigger(s) for FOREIGN KEY
check(s)
+ ERROR: Relation pg_temp_5. does not exist
That's pretty
Rod, are you still seeing this failure?
---
Rod Taylor wrote:
On Wed, 2002-09-04 at 22:39, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
will announce it on -announce tomorrow, if ppl want to take a quick look
at it ... man pages
Yep, and he couldn't reproduce it either, and on a different platform.
I think that indicates we do have a problem in there, it just doesn't
show very often. He even got ASCII garbage in the error message.
---
Rod Taylor
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yep, and he couldn't reproduce it either, and on a different platform.
I think that indicates we do have a problem in there, it just doesn't
show very often.
I agree, this looks a lot like a low-probability bug. But how to attack
it when we can't
Tom Lane writes:
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
SunOS control.shared2 5.7 Generic_106541-20 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-5_10
shows an error in ALTER TABLE tests:
ALTER TABLE FKTABLE ADD FOREIGN KEY(ftest1) references
pktable(ptest1);
NOTICE: ALTER TABLE will create implicit
Marc G. Fournier writes:
Actually, I just asked for the split, I think it was peter that actually
did it ... :)
I recall that you thought of the split in order to save bandwidth for
those who didn't need everything. It was expressedly intended that the
-base tarball was usable by itself and
On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
%ls -lt ~ftp/pub/source/v7.3beta
Is this where you're putting it this time? Last time was ~ftp/pub/beta.
Vince.
--
==
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSHemail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
%ls -lt ~ftp/pub/source/v7.3beta
Is this where you're putting it this time? Last time was ~ftp/pub/beta.
actually, should be a symlink, but until I know the packaging and all is
well, I'm avoiding put
On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
%ls -lt ~ftp/pub/source/v7.3beta
Is this where you're putting it this time? Last time was ~ftp/pub/beta.
actually, should be a symlink, but until I
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
actually, should be a symlink, but until I know the packaging and all is
well, I'm avoiding put it in there ...
I pulled down the main tarball -- looks good AFAICT.
regards, tom lane
---(end of
On Wed, 2002-09-04 at 22:39, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
will announce it on -announce tomorrow, if ppl want to take a quick look
at it ... man pages weren't included, but I did regenerate the docs per
Peter's suggested commands ...
'./configure make check' passes on i386 FreeBSD.
SunOS
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
SunOS control.shared2 5.7 Generic_106541-20 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-5_10
shows an error in ALTER TABLE tests:
ALTER TABLE FKTABLE ADD FOREIGN KEY(ftest1) references
pktable(ptest1);
NOTICE: ALTER TABLE will create implicit trigger(s) for FOREIGN KEY
On Thu, 2002-09-05 at 11:19, Tom Lane wrote:
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
SunOS control.shared2 5.7 Generic_106541-20 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-5_10
shows an error in ALTER TABLE tests:
ALTER TABLE FKTABLE ADD FOREIGN KEY(ftest1) references
pktable(ptest1);
NOTICE: ALTER
Guys,
postgresql7.3b1 does not build :-(, seems like a missing multibyte
directory
'
| make[4]: Entering directory
|`/home/masm/download/postgresql-7.3b1/src/backend/utils/time'
| gcc -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations
Manuel Sugawara [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
or I'm missing something?
So it would seem. The utils/mb directory is certainly there in the full
tarball that I pulled from ftp.us.postgresql.org this morning. How did
you acquire your source tree, exactly?
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So it would seem. The utils/mb directory is certainly there in the full
tarball that I pulled from ftp.us.postgresql.org this morning. How did
you acquire your source tree, exactly?
The file is postgresql-base-7.3b1.tar.gz from
On 5 Sep 2002, Manuel Sugawara wrote:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So it would seem. The utils/mb directory is certainly there in the full
tarball that I pulled from ftp.us.postgresql.org this morning. How did
you acquire your source tree, exactly?
The file is
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You need either the 7.3b1.tar.gz (which is everything), or you need to get
all the various -*- parts (which are more manageable)
Oh, well. Thanks
Regards,
Manuel.
--
No es que no puedan hallar la solución: es que no ven el problema.
G.K. Chesterson
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On 5 Sep 2002, Manuel Sugawara wrote:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So it would seem. The utils/mb directory is certainly there in the full
tarball that I pulled from ftp.us.postgresql.org this morning. How did
you acquire your source tree, exactly?
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You need either the 7.3b1.tar.gz (which is everything), or you need to get
all the various -*- parts (which are more manageable)
I am confused. Are you saying the base file isn't compilable?
My idea was that it is.
Regards,
Manuel.
On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On 5 Sep 2002, Manuel Sugawara wrote:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So it would seem. The utils/mb directory is certainly there in the full
tarball that I pulled from ftp.us.postgresql.org this morning.
Bruce Momjian writes:
I am confused. Are you saying the base file isn't compilable?
The mb stuff is missing because it used to be optional in the old
splitting scheme. Needs to be rethought.
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of
Marc G. Fournier writes:
Scary, even with removing a load of stuff over to gborg, its still gotten
bigger then the last release :)
Not hard to find the culprit:
7.2:
3.4Msrc/backend/utils/mb
7.3:
9.6Msrc/backend/utils/mb
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hrmm ... that is odd, now that you mention it ... but the file
'distributions' between v7.2 and v7.3beta appear to be the same, so -base-
was broken in the old one too?
It was never intended that the base tarfile was alone sufficient to do
anything,
Tom Lane wrote:
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hrmm ... that is odd, now that you mention it ... but the file
'distributions' between v7.2 and v7.3beta appear to be the same, so -base-
was broken in the old one too?
It was never intended that the base tarfile was alone
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Marc G. Fournier writes:
Scary, even with removing a load of stuff over to gborg, its still gotten
bigger then the last release :)
Not hard to find the culprit:
7.2:
3.4Msrc/backend/utils/mb
7.3:
9.6Msrc/backend/utils/mb
Wow. Just checking
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK, so if base isn't compilable, then what is it good for? I don't see
any add-on packages that would make it usable.
AFAIR, the only reason for having the split packaging is to accommodate
people who are downloading across flaky connections --- less to
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK, so if base isn't compilable, then what is it good for? I don't see
any add-on packages that would make it usable.
AFAIR, the only reason for having the split packaging is to accommodate
people who are downloading across flaky
0On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK, so if base isn't compilable, then what is it good for? I don't see
any add-on packages that would make it usable.
AFAIR, the only reason for having the split packaging is to accommodate
people who are
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
0On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK, so if base isn't compilable, then what is it good for? I don't see
any add-on packages that would make it usable.
AFAIR, the only reason for having the split packaging is to
On Fri, 2002-09-06 at 03:14, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
0On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK, so if base isn't compilable, then what is it good for? I don't see
any add-on packages that would make it usable.
AFAIR, the only reason for having
will announce it on -announce tomorrow, if ppl want to take a quick look
at it ... man pages weren't included, but I did regenerate the docs per
Peter's suggested commands ...
Scary, even with removing a load of stuff over to gborg, its still gotten
bigger then the last release :)
%ls -lt
32 matches
Mail list logo
