On Fri, 2002-06-14 at 02:10, David Ford wrote:
... while talking to sss.pgh.pa.us.:
MAIL From:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
550 5.7.1 Probable spam from 68.9.71.221 refused - see
http://www.five-ten-sg.com/blackhole.php?68.9.71.221
554 5.0.0 Service unavailable
Tom, if you block
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Mike Mascari wrote:
CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE
...
ON COMMIT DROP;
pseudo-compatible with the SQL-standard of:
ON COMMIT { DELETE | PRESERVE } ROWS;
so one day PostgreSQL's grammar would look like:
...
ON COMMIT { DROP | { DELETE | PRESERVE } ROWS };
I think
What is the preferred method (if there even is one) for modifying the
comment on a language?
I vaguely remember it being documented that it was stored in
pg_language.lancompiler and specified using the LANCOMPILER option to
CREATE LANGUAGE or by updating the record directly. pgAdmin has done it
pg_auth=# select version();
version
PostgreSQL 7.2 on i686-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC 3.0.2
Which btw has a curious grant/revoke bug. create foo; grant select on
foo to bar;
Dave Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What is the preferred method (if there even is one) for modifying the
comment on a language?
There isn't one. Certainly LANCOMPILER was *never* meant as a place to
store comments.
I suppose a COMMENT ON LANGUAGE facility could be added, but I can't get
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 14 June 2002 14:49
To: Dave Page
Cc: PostgreSQL-development
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Language Comments
Dave Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What is the preferred method (if there even is one) for
modifying
As you probably know, SQL99 has dropped the rather useless
categorizations of basic, intermediate, and advanced SQL
compliance and instead lists a large number of labeled features. I've
put these into an appendix for the docs (not yet committed to cvs).
The list is organized as a (for now) three
Tom Lane wrote:
Mike Mascari [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
... Would it be possible to have either a GUC setting or a grammar
change to allow TEMPORARY tables to be dropped at transaction commit?
This seems like a not unreasonable idea; but the lack of other responses
suggests that the
Tom, Bruce,
Back in 7.1.0, we had a problem where no index could be used on ORDER
BY ... DESC statements. Has this been fixed? I'm writing an article
on indexing.
-Josh Berkus
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
There are various paths of control in md5_crypt_verify that do
if (passwd)
pfree(passwd);
if (valuntil)
pfree(valuntil);
Isn't this now pfree'ing part of the saved pre-parsed pg_pwd data?
Question:
How feasible would it be to create this functionality in PostgreSQL:
One creates a test version of a database that initially consists of
read-links to the production version of the same database. Any code he/she
then writes that reads from a table reads from the production
Tom Lane wrote:
David Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom, if you block everyone on cable, dialup, dsl, and adsl, then you're probably blocking a lot of legitimate mail.
David, let me explain this in words of one syllable: I am currently
rejecting upwards of 2000 spam
I have just tested this on the latest code using the following
Connection con = JDBC2Tests.openDB();
try
{
// transaction mode
con.setAutoCommit(false);
Statement stmt = con.createStatement();
stmt.execute(select 1/0);
Thanks for reading. A few disclaimers:
1. I am a newbie. I program for a living, but my work in pg has so far
been at the devoted hobby level, using pg and PHP. For an example of
what I have done with pg, you can visit www.the-athenaeum.org, a site I
one day hope to make into a business.
Matthew Tedder wrote:
Question:
How feasible would it be to create this functionality in PostgreSQL:
One creates a test version of a database that initially consists of
read-links to the production version of the same database. Any code he/she
then writes that reads from a table reads
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Mike Mascari [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
... Would it be possible to have either a GUC setting or a grammar
change to allow TEMPORARY tables to be dropped at transaction commit?
This seems like a not unreasonable idea; but the lack of other
On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 11:39:55 -0400,
Chris McCormick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for reading. A few disclaimers:
MY PROBLEM - Because this site deals with, among other things, ancient
art, acheaology, and anthropology, I need a way to handle dates as
specific as a single day,
I think that when SERIAL is used, the sequence should be tied
inextricably to the table which created it, and it should be
hidden from
use for other purposes (perhaps similar to the way a toast table
is). If
you *want* to use a sequence across several tables, then you don't
use
SERIAL,
On Fri, 14 Jun 2002, Mike Mascari wrote:
That is what I want to do, except by extending the grammar. I must admit
to actually being surprised that a TEMP table created inside a
transaction lived after the transaction completed. That's when I looked
at the standard and saw that PostgreSQL's
Tom Lane wrote:
There are various paths of control in md5_crypt_verify that do
if (passwd)
pfree(passwd);
if (valuntil)
pfree(valuntil);
Isn't this now pfree'ing part of the saved pre-parsed pg_pwd data?
Oops, yep.
On Thu, 2002-06-13 at 16:39, Chris McCormick wrote:
...
THE BACKGROUND - I am creating a web site where people can study the
humanities. They can upload, discuss, and peer-review information.
They can also create, edit, approve, and delete records in a postgresql
db, using web forms.
I've just committed changes to include an SQL99 feature list as an
appendix in the User's Guide. While preparing that I noticed a feature
or two which would be trivial to implement, so we now have LOCALTIME and
LOCALTIMESTAMP function calls per spec (afaict; the spec is very vague
on the
Has this been resolved and patched?
---
Tom Lane wrote:
Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Michael seems to feel that the tuple count should be nonzero if any
of
23 matches
Mail list logo
