[BUGS] bug in pg_dump -- missing CREATE SEQUENCE statements

Hey all, pg_dump fails to output necessary CREATE SEQUENCE statements unless the SERIAL column is named "id" when called with the '-t tablename' switch. When '-t' is not specified, the CREATE SEQUENCE statements do get output. wishing-I'd-noticed-this-Friday-nite-ly y'rs, brent Observerat

[BUGS] problems linking with-tcl

Hi I want to install postgres sql with tcl on RISC/6000 under AIX 4.3.2 I downloaded postgresql-7.1.3.tar.gz gunziped it and extarted the tar. Then I ran ./configure --with-tcl --with-includes=/hci/root3.7.1P/tcl/include --with-libraries=/hci/root3.7.1P/tcl/lib --with-tclconfig=/hci/root3.7.1P/

[BUGS] Bug #535: postgreSQL v7.1.3 doesn't build properly with gcc v3.0.2 on Solaris 8

Robert Berglin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 3 The lower the number the more severe it is. Short Description postgreSQL v7.1.3 doesn't build properly with gcc v3.0.2 on Solaris 8 Long Description I attempted a build of postgreSQL v7.1.3 on a Solaris 8 system using gcc v3.0

Re: [BUGS] Bug #534: factorial function

Original Message Subject: Re: [BUGS] Bug #534: factorial function Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:28:15 +0100 From: "Janko F. Richter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hallo Bruce, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Yep, 0! sure looks

Re: [BUGS] Bug #534: factorial function

Thomas Lockhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> ... I'd be sorely tempted to replace all three by a single >> function that takes integer and returns numeric. > Yikes. Although numeric is theoretically nice, it is hundreds of times > slower than native doubles. (a) As a wise man once said, "I can

Re: [BUGS] Bug #534: factorial function

> ... I'd be sorely tempted to replace all three by a single > function that takes integer and returns numeric. Yikes. Although numeric is theoretically nice, it is hundreds of times slower than native doubles. We've already moved it in to some of the other aggregate math functions without much d

Re: [BUGS] Bug #534: factorial function

Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Yep, 0! sure looks like a bug. We will fix it in 7.3. Not sure about > the double precision. Comments? It looks like we have three versions of factorial, for int2 int4 and int8. The version taking int2 is just plain wasted code space (perhaps it pre

Re: [BUGS] Bug #531: libpq: Operations following PQfinish() work.

Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This is an interesting question. Should we clear these variables for > safety. Rather difficult considering that it's passed by value. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)---

Re: [BUGS] Bug #534: factorial function

Yep, 0! sure looks like a bug. We will fix it in 7.3. Not sure about the double precision. Comments? --- > Janko Richter ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 3 > The lower the number the more severe it is

Re: [BUGS] Bug #532: backend crashes due to segmentation fault

Yes, fixed in later releases. --- > yaniv hamo ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 1 > The lower the number the more severe it is. > > Short Description > backend crashes due to segmentation fault > > Lon

Re: [BUGS] Bug #531: libpq: Operations following PQfinish() work.

This is an interesting question. Should we clear these variables for safety. I can't think of any other software that does this. --- > Anthony Chavez ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 4 > The lower the

[BUGS] Bug #534: factorial function

Janko Richter ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 3 The lower the number the more severe it is. Short Description factorial function Long Description 1. The factorial function returns 0 when the argument is 0. The factorial Funtion is defined as: factorial(0)=1 2. It would be