KADIR ROJAS ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 3
The lower the number the more severe it is.
Short Description
single a suggestion
Long Description
Hello from Panama.
Working with pglib library, I discovered
something, that could become a problem for the developers if they d
Never mind. I read the commit message.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > Large data field causes a backend crash.
>
> > test=# copy test from '/stf/bruc/RnD/genscan/foo.test';
> > TRAP: Too Large Allocation Request("!(0 < (size) && (size) <= ((Size)
>0xfff)):size=268435456 [0x1000]", File
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > Large data field causes a backend crash.
>
> > test=# copy test from '/stf/bruc/RnD/genscan/foo.test';
> > TRAP: Too Large Allocation Request("!(0 < (size) && (size) <= ((Size)
>0xfff)):size=268435456 [0x1000]", File: "mcxt.c", Line: 478)
> > !(0 < (size)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Large data field causes a backend crash.
> test=# copy test from '/stf/bruc/RnD/genscan/foo.test';
> TRAP: Too Large Allocation Request("!(0 < (size) && (size) <= ((Size)
>0xfff)):size=268435456 [0x1000]", File: "mcxt.c", Line: 478)
> !(0 < (size) && (size) <=
Robert Bruccoleri ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 3
The lower the number the more severe it is.
Short Description
Large data field causes a backend crash.
Long Description
In testing TOAST in PostgreSQL 7.1beta4, I was curious to see
how big a field could actually be handled
Max Vaschenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have a RedHat Linux 6.2 (kernel 2.2.18pre1 SMP) on Intel platform.
> Postgres-7.0.3-2 (RPM).
> It grows. Initially about 5mb it grows to 60-70 mb after 2-3 weeks.
Is this the *postmaster* that's growing, or an individual backend that
you've kept runni
Myron Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> May I suggest that watiHolder and waitLock pointers
> in the proc struct in proc.h be changed from direct
> pointers to SHMEM_OFFSET. They are both shared memory
> structures in a shared memory structure and it would
> be more consistent to make these SHM
Juan Flynn wrote:
> SELECT to_char(timestamp '23-Mar-2000' + 3, 'Mon DD');
> to_char
> -
> Mar 25
> (1 row)
>
> Which is wrong, however:
Dates are interpreted "at a special time" (midnight).
Mar 25 is most likely a daylightsaving day for your timezone.
Just add some hours to the resu
On Sun, 4 Feb 2001, Juan Flynn wrote:
> I've come across an odd bug in Postgres 7 (7.0.3 I think) that's probably
> best explained with an example:
> SELECT to_char(timestamp '23-Mar-2000' + 3, 'Mon DD');
> to_char
> -
> Mar 25
> (1 row)
in 7.1:
test=# SELECT to_char(timestamp '23-
Hi.
I have a RedHat Linux 6.2 (kernel 2.2.18pre1 SMP) on Intel platform.
Postgres-7.0.3-2 (RPM).
It grows. Initially about 5mb it grows to 60-70 mb after 2-3 weeks.
I use plpgsql.
If it does matter, server have a chrooted area. Postgres is running in root
but accessed both from root and from chroo
> console. But I didn't found them in pgsql documentation. Is it possible that
> this function will be removed in future version of postgresql ?
> pps. Can I take description of this function ?
As said Tom, ichar() is chr() in 7.1.
Lates (devel) docs:
http://www.postgresql.org/devel-corner/do
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Juan Flynn) writes:
> This odd date bug seems to skip over March 26 2000, and it occurs also
> on March 25 2001 and March 30 2002.
Would those happen to be daylight-savings-time transition dates in your
timezone? If so, this is a known bug; it's fixed for 7.1.
Hi All,
This is not working
test=# select rpad ( host ( '127.0.0.1' ), 15 );
rpad
---
127.0.0.1
(1 row)
This working OK
test=# select rpad ( host ( '127.0.0.1' ) || '', 15 );
rpad
-
127.0.0.1
(1 row)
Other examples
test=# select now() where
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ing. Pavel Janousek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 2
> The lower the number the more severe it is.
>
> Short Description
> ECPG, cursors and transactions
>
> Long Description
> When I use ECPG in transactions I got some bad results - I think that t
Hi,
May I suggest that watiHolder and waitLock pointers
in the proc struct in proc.h be changed from direct
pointers to SHMEM_OFFSET. They are both shared memory
structures in a shared memory structure and it would
be more consistent to make these SHMEM_OFFSET. Direct
pointers will be a problem
Hi Tom,
> >> What does EXPLAIN VERBOSE select * from foo where a like 'Test/%';
> >> show?
>
> Well, the indexqual is just what it should be for C locale:
>
> :indxqual ((
> { EXPR :typeOid 16 :opType op :oper
> { OPER :opno 1061 :opid 1052 :opresulttype 16 } :args (
> { VAR :varno 1 :varattn
I've come across an odd bug in Postgres 7 (7.0.3 I think) that's probably
best explained with an example:
SELECT to_char(timestamp '23-Mar-2000' + 1, 'Mon DD');
to_char
-
Mar 24
(1 row)
Which is correct.
SELECT to_char(timestamp '23-Mar-2000' + 2, 'Mon DD');
to_char
-
Mar 25
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> About 1 time out of 20, the call
> to PGconnectdb fails with a segfault signal.
Well, you've already got some pretty severe problems then. Seems to me
you ought to track down the reason for this failure before worrying
about cosmetic issues like an ungraceful disconne
Hello, I too am experiencing problem with executeUpdate returning a 1
when deleting 0 records. My platform is Corel Linux. I am using
Java1.3 and JDBC.
In the datamodeller of JBuilder 4, only the systemtables are shown.
The Problem is in the funtion
getTableTypes() in the file
src/interfaces/jdbc/org/postgresql/jdbc2/DatabaseMetaData.java
This function should return a list of TableTypes. But it resturns a list of
6 Identical entries
(SYSTEM I
Good day.
It's some differences in results, then I inserted char(1) type:
create table ku(n_pp int4, col char(1));
insert into ku values(1, '\000');
insert into ku values(2, '\040');
insert into ku values(3, ichar(0));
insert into ku values(4, ichar(32));
select n_pp, ascii(col) from ku ;
n_p
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > I have been getting the dreaded "unexpected EOF on client
> > connection" in my system logs, but the surprising thing is that
> > it comes from psql (I think). I am executing psql
> > via a 'system' system call, and about 1 time out of 20 I get
>
On Sat, 3 Feb 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> "And. Andruikhanov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > insert into ku values(1, '\000');
>
> This cannot work as you expect, because what comes out of the parser is
> a string containing a single null character --- and that's fed to a
> datatype input routine
23 matches
Mail list logo
