Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> John Scott writes:
>> but, as i understand the sql92 standard, both att = null and att != null
>> are NOT sql92.
> They are. We just don't implement att = null right because of reasons
> that can be found in the archives.
In a very narrow sense, th
Guru Prasad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> using postgres 7.1 version. Now the database got corrupted. I had no clue
> how it got corrupted. Basically, i did found that the data of various
> users existing (in /usr/local/pgsql/data directory). But there were no
> data existing in the following syst
Craig Longman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> select (unitcost*probability) from oppproducttype
> ERROR: Unable to identify an operator '*' for types 'numeric' and
> 'float8'
> You will have to retype this query using an explicit cast
> is this kind of thing a regular thing for postgresql?
What version are you using and what error are you getting? Your example
works for me on 7.2devel once i made a dpts table with an id_dpt column.
The function code is not checked for plpgsql until its first
use, so if there was a syntax error, it wouldn't be seen until you
tried to use it.
On S
John Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> select count(*) from A where b = null; /* Returns 1, ok */
> select count(*) from A where b != null; /* Returns 0 ... not ok! */
Uh ... there have been several threads about this just in the past
couple days. See for example
http://www.ca.postgre
Hi,
I've created a function like this :
CREATE FUNCTION tester(INT4)
RETURNS BOOL AS
'
DECLARE
r RECORD;
p ALIAS FOR $1;
BEGIN
SELECT INTO r
id_dpt
FROM dpts
WHERE id_dpt=p;
IF NOT FOUND THEN
RETURN FALSE;
ELSE
RETURN TRUE;
END IF;
END;
'
LANGUAGE 'plpgsql';
All is ok at cr
