Tom Lane wrote:
> I dug through the archives and found that we've had this discussion
> before ;-). The basic argument for having the per-column form of
> pg_get_indexdef do what it does was that it's unreasonable for
> client-side code to try to disassemble an expression tree string,
> whereas ex
Dave Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hm, there is a definitional issue here. Should pg_get_indexdef print
>> this stuff at all when colno is nonzero?
>> ...
>> Dave, I think we put in this variant of the function for pgAdmin ---
>> what does pgAdmin need?
> More is better fo
Tom Lane wrote:
> NikhilS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> Looks like pg_get_indexdef is unwell :-(
>
>> yes, it was unwell in the area where the amcanorder was being processed. The
>> attached patch should fix this.
>
> Hm, there is a definitional issue here. Should pg_get_indexdef print
> this
NikhilS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Looks like pg_get_indexdef is unwell :-(
> yes, it was unwell in the area where the amcanorder was being processed. The
> attached patch should fix this.
Hm, there is a definitional issue here. Should pg_get_indexdef print
this stuff at all when colno is no
Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Hello
>
> it's pgAdmin bug. please report it there
Actually it doesn't appear to be...
Using the OPs example code on 8.3 beta 4:
>> CREATE INDEX test_desc_idx1
>> ON test_desc
>> USING btree
>> (f1, f2 desc)
>>
>> CREATE INDEX test_desc_idx2
>> ON test_desc
>> U
Hello
it's pgAdmin bug. please report it there
Regards
Pavel Stehule
On 19/12/2007, Boonchai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The following bug has been logged online:
>
> Bug reference: 3829
> Logged by: Boonchai
> Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> PostgreSQL version: 8.3 beta
