Well, actually the question of whether failing referential actions
due to permission deficits of the user doing the delete/update
on the pk table is a bug or feature still stands. It would be
fairly trivial to extend Peter's patch to effectively setuid on
the actions, but the question is whether
Kensaku MASUDA ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 2
The lower the number the more severe it is.
Short Description
ResultSet.getTimestamp() was broken.
Long Description
About #70, It can not cover all cases. So restored data are presented by original
format string.
Best way
Oh, OK. I will forget it.
>
> Actually Peter did a patch for this fairly recently I
> believe. I haven't grabbed CVS recently enough to know
> if it got committed. There's a related question of what
> permissions you need to follow referential actions (currently
> it's the same permission as
Kensaku MASUDA ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 2
The lower the number the more severe it is.
Short Description
ResultSet.getTimestamp() was broken
Long Description
This report is same as #8. And collect format string is here.
from
"-MM-dd HH:mm:ss.zzz"
t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> SELECT id from questions where id < 40 intersect select id from questions where id >
>20 order by id;
> ERROR: get_sortgroupclause_tle: ORDER/GROUP BY expression not found in targetlist
Already fixed in current sources, but thanks for the report.
Actually Peter did a patch for this fairly recently I
believe. I haven't grabbed CVS recently enough to know
if it got committed. There's a related question of what
permissions you need to follow referential actions (currently
it's the same permission as if you were doing the implied
statement
Petr Splichal ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 2
The lower the number the more severe it is.
Short Description
ORDER BY on INTERSECT
Long Description
I was not able to make an ORDER BY on INTERSECT of two SELECTs.
Instead I got this error:
] get_sortgroupclause_tle: ORDER/GR
