On Wed, 11 Apr 2007, Jim Nasby wrote:
> I agree with others that the way that query is constructed is a bit
> odd, but it does bring another optimization to mind: when doing an
> inner-join between a parent and child table when RI is defined
> between them, if the query only refers to the child ta
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
> A recent discussion led me to the idea that FK triggers are fired
> unnecessarily during an UPDATE if the foreign-key column(s) contain
> any NULLs, because ri_KeysEqual() treats two nulls as unequal,
> and therefore we conclude the row has changed when it ha
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
> A recent discussion led me to the idea that FK triggers are fired
> unnecessarily during an UPDATE if the foreign-key column(s) contain
> any NULLs, because ri_KeysEqual() treats two nulls as unequal,
> and therefore we conclude the row has changed when it ha
On Fri, 10 Aug 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
> I noticed the following behavior in CVS HEAD, using a pattern that is
> capable of matching no characters:
>
> regression=# SELECT foo FROM regexp_matches('ab cde', $re$\s*$re$, 'g') AS
> foo;
> foo
> ---
> {""}
> {""}
> {" "}
> {""}
> {""}
> {"
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Because we already do exactly that here:
>
> select 1, (select col2 from c), 3;
>
> The inner select returns a ROW, yet we treat it as a single column
> value.
The inner select does not return a row. It's not a , it's a
.
---
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 10:32 -0700, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >
> > > Because we already do exactly that here:
> > >
> > > select 1, (select col2 from c), 3;
> > >
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 10:59 -0700, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 10:32 -0700, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 11:24 -0700, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 10:59 -0700, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Simon Riggs wrote:
> &
On Sat, 6 Oct 2007, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-10-06 at 10:15 -0700, Stephan Szabo wrote:
>
> > > Yeh, it does, but you're forgetting that my original complaint was that
> > > you couldn't use it in an ANY clause, which 4.2 does not exclude.
> >
On Tue, 23 Dec 2008, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> The page locking provides this because every index page or data page
> the serializable transaction looks at is locked against updates until
> the end of the transaction. If it can see all the COLUMN=0 rows
> through an index, the index locks protect
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Tom Lane wrote:
> I note BTW that we have some ad-hoc logic already that arranges to
> suppress queuing of AFTER events for FK triggers, if the FK column
> value has not changed. It might be interesting to look at whether
> that hack could be unified with the user-accessible
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009, Emmanuel Cecchet wrote:
> As I explained to Tom, if the after row trigger is called asynchronously
> I get a relcache leak on the child table at the end of the copy
> operation. If the trigger is called synchronously (like a before row
> trigger) it works fine. Also calling t
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009, Emmanuel Cecchet wrote:
> Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > On Sun, 22 Nov 2009, Emmanuel Cecchet wrote:
> >
> >
> >> As I explained to Tom, if the after row trigger is called asynchronously
> >> I get a relcache leak on the child table at the
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alexey Nalbat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > create table t1 ( id integer primary key, name text );
> > create table t2 ( id integer references t1 );
> > insert into t1 values ( 1 );
> > insert into t2 values ( 1 );
>
> > Then two concurrent transactions sta
On Sun, 1 Mar 2009, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > The standard doesn't have multi-dimensional arrays, so it's entirely
> > possible that somewhere in it there is wording that makes cardinality()
> > equivalent to the length of the first dimension. But I concur with
> > Andrew that this is flat w
On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Mario Weilguni wrote:
> As promised here's an example of deadlock using foreign keys.
>
> create table lang (
> id integer not null primary key,
> name text
> );
> insert into lang values (1, 'English');
> insert into lang values (2, 'German');
>
> create table country (
On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:
> b=# create table stuff (stuff_id serial unique);
> NOTICE: CREATE TABLE will create implicit sequence
> 'stuff_stuff_id_seq' for SERIAL column 'stuff.stuff_id'
> NOTICE: CREATE TABLE / UNIQUE will create implicit index
> 'stuff_stuff_id_key' for table 's
On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Michael Loftis wrote:
> I know I know, replying to myself is bad and probably means I'm going
> insane but thought of one other thing...
>
> Realistically the system should choos *ANY* index over a sequential
> table scan. Above a fairly low number of records any indexed que
On Thu, 18 Apr 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> This particular test involves a table with a foreign-key reference to
> itself, ie, it's both PK and FK. What apparently is happening is that
> the two RI triggers are now being fired in a different order than
> before. While either of them would have dete
On Thu, 18 Apr 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Didn't someone (Peter?) say that the mandated firing order was based on
> > creation order/time in SQL99?
>
> It does say that:
>
> The order of execution of a
On Thu, 2 May 2002, Louis-David Mitterrand wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 7.2.1 debian-unstable PG hangs when trying to drop a table which
> contains a field referencing another field in the same table as a
> foreign key.
>
> Is it legal/orhtodox to use a "references" on another field of the same
> table?
On Fri, 3 May 2002, Neil Conway wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The SQL92 spec has this to say about SET CONSTRAINTS DEFERRED:
>
> a) If ALL is specified, then the constraint mode in TXN of all
>constraints that are DEFERRABLE is set to deferred.
>
> b) Otherwise, the constraint mode in TXN
On Fri, 3 May 2002, Neil Conway wrote:
> On Fri, 3 May 2002 10:39:28 -0700 (PDT)
> "Stephan Szabo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 3 May 2002, Neil Conway wrote:
> > > My reading of this: if you specify ALL, only the constraints marked
>
On Sun, 12 May 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Manfred Koizar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > A *stack* of _active_ transaction numbers is not sufficient, we need
> > the whole *tree* of _all_ transactions belonging to the current top
> > level transaction. This is, want I wanted to model in my pg_subt
On Fri, 10 May 2002, large scale wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have two tables, one has 25000 rows and the other
> has 6.5 million rows.
>
> (25000 rows)
> table1
> (id text,
> start int,
> stop int)
>
> with seperate index on three individual fiels.
>
> 6.5 million rows
> table2
> (id text,
> start
On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > As a related side note. The other part of the original patch (the NOT
> > EXISTS in the upd/del no action trigger) was rejected. For match
> > full and match unspecified the same res
On Thu, 20 Jun 2002, Jan Wieck wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 20 Jun 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > > This line bothers me. With multiple people working on Win32, I would
> > > like us to decide how we would _like_ such a port to be implemented. I
> > > think this will a
On Sat, 22 Jun 2002, Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
> > However, others don't believe constraints other than foreign keys
> > should go unchecked.
> >
> > That said, is this functionality wanted outside of pg_dump /
> > pg_restore?
>
> pg_dump should reload a database as it was stored in the previou
On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Consider
>
> CREATE TABLE foo (f1 int primary key);
>
> CREATE TABLE bar (f1 int references foo);
>
> DROP TABLE foo RESTRICT;
>
> Should this succeed? Or should it be necessary to say DROP CASCADE to
> get rid of the foreign-key reference
On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> DROP TABLE foo RESTRICT;
> >>
> >> Should this succeed? Or should it be necessary to say DROP CASCADE to
> >> get rid
On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> If the conversion where varchar(5) --> char(5) then
> >> they would compare equal.
>
> > I am not sure, since, if the varchar stored 'S ' then the comparison
> > to a char 'S' should probably sti
On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Yuva Chandolu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I see different results in Oracle and postgres for same outer join queries.
> Here are the details.
Those probably aren't the same outer join queries.
> When I run the query "select yt1_name, yt1_descr, yt2_name, yt2_descr from
> yuva_test1 l
On 1 Aug 2002, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> On Thu, 2002-08-01 at 12:29, Curt Sampson wrote:
> > On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote:
> >
> > > I had a "union all" view, which is actually a quite different animal than
> > > a "union" view which needs to eliminate duplicates before furth
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> On 1 Aug 2002, Hannu Krosing wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2002-08-01 at 12:29, Curt Sampson wrote:
> > > On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote:
> > >
> > > > I had a "union all" view, which
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > For union, queries that want to do something like use a temporary
> > sequence to act sort of like rownum and do row limiting. Admittedly
> > that's already pretty much unspecif
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > If we assume two collations one case sensitive one not with the
> > except in the non-sensitive and the where in the sensitive and
> > a left with 'A' and right with
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > So if T1 has a #dups>0 and T2 has a #dups>0 we should get
> > no rows, but what if T1' (with the clause) has a #dups>0 but
> > T2' has a #dups=0?
>
> Um, yo
I wonder if we actually did the right thing with this.
For example:
select cast('ab' as char(1));
Using sql92's definitions, I read TD as
a fixed length character string and
SD as the same.
Which means I think the section that
comes into play is:
SQL92 6.10 GR5 c ii
ii) If the length in ch
I'm planning on trying out a version
of the check done for foreign keys that does
a query on the fktable with a NOT EXISTS
subselect rather than the current run the
trigger for each row (thus doing one query
per row of the table). I want to see if this
tends to be faster than what we're d
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Joe Conway wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >>I agree 100%. If you want an index, unique constraint, or primary key on
> > >>a SERIAL, I think you should explicitly add it. SERIAL should give me a
> > >>column
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
In general I think it sounds good, so I'm only responding to places where
I want to say something specific.
> I am not by any means wedded to the above type names; does anyone have
> suggestions for better names? (In particular, I am wondering if "tuple"
> a
cates a fix was being worked on.
>
> Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 09:03:06 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Stephan Szabo
>
> Please see past disussions on the fact that the lock grabbed is too
> strong. I'm going to (when I get time to work on it) try out a lower
> strength lock that Alex Hayward
On 26 Aug 2002, Thomas O'Dowd wrote:
> Thanks for your feedback Stephan. Seems like a tough fix. Pitty it won't
> make it into 7.3. I presume there are other folk out there suffering
> from the same problems that I'm having. What approaches if any have
> people taken to work around this problem?
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Mario Weilguni wrote:
> I wrote this patch for my system, and it works fine. However, it's a
> really ugly workaround. I can publish the source if anybody is
> interested.
Which, the for update one or a lower strength lock? In either case,
certainly.
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Mario Weilguni wrote:
> Not a lower strength lock, I would, but I'm not so familiar with the postgres
> internals. I modified ri-triggers.c to exclude certain tables from the
> locking itself (because I know the tables are not updated).
It might help the op of this thread, s
On Wed, 28 Aug 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> Now that we have prepared statements, should the foreign key code be changed
> to use them? I think it's highly likely that they will be reused in a
> connection. Might be an idea.
It might be worth doing eventually just to standardize, but
On 31 Aug 2002, Zhicong Leo Liang wrote:
> Hi all,
> Just briefly describe my problem.
> I have two tables.
> create table A(
>a1 serial primary key,
>a2 varchars(10)
> );
> create table B(
> b1 integer primary key,
> b2 Integer,
> foreign key(b2) references a(a1)
On 4 Sep 2002, Scott Shattuck wrote:
> Under what conditions would the following statement cause the USERS
> table to lock out selects?
>
>
> alter table my_coupons
> add constraint FK_mc_user_id
> FOREIGN KEY (mc_frn_user_id)
> REFERENCES users(user_ID);
If I'm reading code correctly, an
On 4 Sep 2002, Scott Shattuck wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-09-04 at 15:51, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> >
> > On 4 Sep 2002, Scott Shattuck wrote:
> >
> > > Under what conditions would the following statement cause the USERS
> > > table to lock out selects?
&
On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> The following happens in latest CVS and a fresh database:
>
> create table test (a int);
> insert into test values (1);
> alter table test add column b text check (b <> '');
> alter table test add check (a > 0);
> alter table test add check (a <> 1);
On Sun, 8 Sep 2002, Steve Howe wrote:
> 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.
As it seems we're voting, I think Tom's scheme i
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Steve Howe 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/
On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> On Monday 09 September 2002 11:03 pm, Rod Taylor wrote:
> > On Mon, 2002-09-09 at 17:04, snpe wrote:
> > > I'm use 'autocommit=false' and have problem with psql
> > > When any commnad is lost, then next commnad get error for transactions
> > > (simple select co
On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> On Tuesday 10 September 2002 03:05 am, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> > > On Monday 09 September 2002 11:03 pm, Rod Taylor wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2002-09-09 at 17:04, snpe wrote:
> > >
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Jan Wieck wrote:
> > We should surely keep this on a much more technical level and avoid any
> > personal offendings. To do so, please explain to me why you think that
> > triggers and constraints are out of focus here? What is the difference
> > between
> > > > It starts a transaction, failes the first command and goes into the
> > > > error has occurred in this transaction state. Seems like reasonable
> > > > behavior.
> > >
> > > Select command don't start transaction - it is not good
> >
> > I think you need more justification than "it is not
On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> All the problems here are coming from INSTEAD rules. We don't have
> >> INSTEAD triggers or contraints.
>
> >
On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, scott.marlowe wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, Stephan Szabo wrote:
>
> > > > > > It starts a transaction, failes the first command and goes into the
> > > > > > error has occurred in this transaction state.
On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> On Tuesday 10 September 2002 07:46 pm, scott.marlowe wrote:
> > What if it's a select for update? IF that failed because of a timout on a
> > lock, shouldn't the transaction fail? Or a select into? Either of those
> > should make a transaction fail, and they
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> On Tuesday 10 September 2002 11:50 pm, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 10 September 2002 07:46 pm, scott.marlowe wrote:
> > > > What if it's a select for update? IF that failed be
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> yes, we're going around in circles.
>
> Ok.I agreed (I think because Oracle do different)
> Transaction start
> I type invalid command
> I correct command
> I get error
>
> Why.If is it transactin, why I get error
> I want continue.
> I am see this error with JD
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 September 2002 02:09 am, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> > > yes, we're going around in circles.
> > >
> > > Ok.I agreed (I think because Oracle do different)
> > &
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 September 2002 02:09 am, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> > > yes, we're going around in circles.
> > >
> > > Ok.I agreed (I think because Oracle do different)
> > &
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 September 2002 04:58 am, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 11 September 2002 02:09 am, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> > >
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 September 2002 03:14 am, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 11 September 2002 02:09 am, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> > >
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 September 2002 02:38 pm, Rod Taylor wrote:
> > > > > Why rollback.This is error (typing error).Nothing happen.
> > > > > I think that we need clear set : what is start transaction ?
> > > > > I think that transaction start with change data in da
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 September 2002 02:55 pm, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> > >
> > > If decision (transaction or not) is after parser (before execute) this
> > > isn't problem.
> > &g
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, snpe wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 September 2002 06:11 pm, Stephan Szabo wrote:
>
> > I again am not sure I understand, are you saying that under serializable
> > select should start a transaction but it shouldn't under read committed?
> > Tha
On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Mike Mascari wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Mike Mascari wrote:
> >
> >>Actually, looking at the pg_pwd code, you want to determine a
> >>way for:
> >>
> >>1. Process 1 opens "foo"
> >>2. Process 2 opens "foo"
> >>3. Process 1 creates "bar"
> >>4. Process 1 renames "bar"
On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Mike Mascari wrote:
> Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Mike Mascari wrote:
> >>So far, MoveFileEx("foo", "bar", MOVEFILE_REPLACE_EXISTING)
> >>returns "Access Denied" when Process 1 attempts the rename
On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Mike Mascari wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I don't think we are not going to be supporting Win9X so there isn't an
> > issue there. We will be supporting Win2000/NT/XP.
> >
> > I don't understand FILE_SHARE_DELETE. I read the description at:
> >
> >
>http://msdn.mi
On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Tomas Lehuta wrote:
> Hello!
>
> i'm using PostgreSQL 7.2.1 and got strange parse errors..
> could somebody tell me what's wrong with this timestamp query example?
>
> PostgreSQL said: ERROR: parser: parse error at or near "date"
> Your query:
>
> select timestamp(date '1998-
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Patrick Welche's recent problems (see pgsql-general) point out that the
> old CREATE CONSTRAINT TRIGGER syntax that optionally omits a "FROM
> table" clause doesn't work anymore --- the system *needs* tgconstrrelid
> to be set in an RI constraint trigger rec
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> However, if we are going to put that kind of knowledge into pg_dump,
> >> it would only be a small further step to have it dump these triggers
> >> as ALTER TABLE ADD CONST
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I have seen no discussion on whether to go ahead with a 7.2.3 to add
> several serious fixes Tom has made to the code in the past few days.
>
> Are we too close to 7.3 for this to be worthwhile? Certainly there will
> be people distributing 7.2.X for s
I've been working on kludging a working
for update barrier style lock (*) for reads
using HeapTupleSatisfiesDirty to test
accessibility to make the foreign keys
work better. I'm fairly close to getting
a testable kludge for the fk/noaction cases
for people to check real sequences against
(since
I wasn't particularly clear (sorry, wrote the message
1/2 right before bed, 1/2 right after getting up) so
I'm going to followup with details and hope that
I'm more awake.
A little background just in case there are people
that haven't looked.
Right now, foreign key checks always default to usi
On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Magnus Naeslund(f) wrote:
> Hello, i've got this query that's really slow...
> Figure this:
>
> testdb=> select now() ; select gid from bs where gid not in ( select x
> from z2test ); select now();
Per FAQ suggestion, try something like
select gid from bs where not exists (s
On 15 Oct 2002, John Halderman wrote:
> I'm currently using 7.3b2 for test and development. I ran into a problem
> using a dumped schema from pg_dump. After importing the dumped schema,
> any delete or update involving a foreign key results in a relation 0
> does not exist error. I noticed that a
On 29 Oct 2002, Ives Landrieu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can anybody explain the following results when using EXPLAIN,
> one time with enable_seqscan=on and one time with enable_seqscan=off.
> What I don't understand is that the nodes created are the same
> (index scan, seq scan), but the costs differ.
Ena
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> On 29 Oct 2002, Ives Landrieu wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Can anybody explain the following results when using EXPLAIN,
> > one time with enable_seqscan=on and one time with enable_seqscan=off.
> > What I don't und
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Pedro Miguel Frazao Fernandes Ferreira wrote:
> In C this is possible:
>
> #include
> #include
>
> int main(void)
> {
>double v;
>char a[30];
>
>v=1.79769313486231571e+308;
>
>printf(" Stored double number: %25.18g\n",v);
>sprintf(a,"%25.18g",v)
On 26 Oct 2002, Doug McNaught wrote:
> Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Doug McNaught <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > make[3]: Entering directory
>`/home/doug/src/pgsql/src/backend/utils/mb/conversion_procs/ascii_and_mic'
> > > gcc -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declaration
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Pedro Miguel Frazao Fernandes Ferreira writes:
>
> > Is there a way to set query output precision to maximum precision ?
> > For the type of application I mentioned this is crucial. People want to
> > get the 'same' numbers, from querys or dumps, as t
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Pedro Miguel Frazao Fernandes Ferreira wrote:
> Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Pedro Miguel Frazao Fernandes Ferreira writes:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Is there a way to se
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Pedro M. Ferreira wrote:
> Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Pedro Miguel Frazao Fernandes Ferreira wrote:
> >>
> >>I understand that if people insert a value of 1.1 in a double, they want
> >>to get 1.1 without knowi
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Pedro M. Ferreira wrote:
> >> I looked at some of these emails and it seemed to me that the problem
> >> was that Tom did'nt want a parameter that would
On Tue, 22 Oct 2002, Igor Georgiev wrote:
> > > edit *pg_hba.conf *
> > > # Allow any user on the local system to connect to any
> > > # database under any username, but only via an IP connection:
> > > host all 127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255trust
>
On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Igor Georgiev wrote:
>
> > Next your going to ask what will stop root from stopping your
> > PostgreSQL, compiling a second copy with authentication disabled and
> > using your data directory as it's source :)
>
> He he somebody can blow up ur home with C4, but this don't stop
On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Achilleus Mantzios wrote:
>
> Hi i think a hit a major problem on 7.2.1.
> I run 3 systems with postgresql 7.2.1.
> Its a redhat 7.1 for development, a redhat 7.3 for production
> and a FreeBSD 4.6.1RC2 for testing.
>
> After long runs (with periodic (daily) vacuum analyze's)
>
On 7 Nov 2002, Neil Conway wrote:
> The 7.3 docs for the PL/PgSQL return statement say:
>
> RETURN with an expression is used to return from a PL/pgSQL function
> that does not return a set.
>
> [...]
>
> If you have declared the function to return void, then the expression
> can be omitted,
I've been wondering (and probably should look through
the code, but figured asking would be faster) if there's
any guarantee that I'll see rows inserted by a transaction
I'm waiting on in the middle of a query.
Basically, if I've got a select that's running using
HeapTupleSatisfiesDirty so that I
On Sat, 9 Nov 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Basically, if I've got a select that's running using
> > HeapTupleSatisfiesDirty so that I can see uncommitted rows
> > and I block in the middle for another transaction (wai
On Sat, 9 Nov 2002, snpe wrote:
> Hello,
> I work with JDeveloper and PostgreSQL JDBC and I have one problem.
> I get error :
> sub-SELECT in FORM must have an alias
> I can't change SQL command, but it is internal JDeveloper command
>
> Is it SQL standard (must have alias) or PostgreSQL spec
On Wed, 13 Nov 2002, Peter Schindler wrote:
> But, if a lot of inserts happens into the child table and there is a
> mix of short and long running transactions, the likelihood of blocking
> is very high, even the inserts are independent and everything is ok
> (prim. key etc.). This is even more e
On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Scott Shattuck wrote:
> It might just be me but it seems that this discussion is missing the
> point if we believe this request is about saving some characters. I
> don't think it is. I think it's about being able to write simple SQL
> scripts that don't produce errors when yo
On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, snpe wrote:
> Problem is when I want change view (or functions) with a lot of dependecies
> I must drop and recreate all dependent views (or functions) - I want add only
> one column in view
> I don't know if solution hard for that.
Well, doing create or replace as a drop/cr
On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote:
>
> > Problem is when I want change view (or functions) with a lot of dependecies
> > I must drop and recreate all dependent views (or functions) -
> > I want add only one column in view
> > I don't know if solution hard for that.
>
> I do not
On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Manfred Koizar wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2002 14:22:51 -0800 (PST), Stephan Szabo
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Right now, I know that it has a hole that lets through invalid data
>
> Stephan, your patch has been posted to -general (Subject: Re
On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Mikheev, Vadim wrote:
> Just wonder how are you going to implement it - is it by using
> some kind of "read-locks", ie FK transaction "locks" PK to prevent
> delete (this is known as "pessimistic" approach)?
> About two years ago we discussed with Jan "optimistic" approach
> w
1 - 100 of 544 matches
Mail list logo
