Re: [BUGS] Bug #620: create index ... (date_part('year', d)) fails

2002-03-15 Thread Stephan Szabo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Ernst Molitor ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 3 > The lower the number the more severe it is. > > Short Description > create index ... (date_part('year', d)) fails > > Long Description > IMHO, creation of an in

Re: [BUGS] Bug #619: Not possible to specify foreign key name

2002-03-15 Thread Stephan Szabo
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Dirk Jacobs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 2 > The lower the number the more severe it is. > > Short Description > Not possible to specify foreign key name > > Long Description > It is not possible to specify a foreign key name.

Re: [BUGS] Bug #617: In SQL the tableowner is not allowed

2002-03-15 Thread Peter Eisentraut
> It seems that it is not allowed to specify the tableowner in an SQL statement And this is a bug exactly why? -- Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgres

Re: [BUGS] Bug #613: Sequence values fall back to previously chec

2002-03-15 Thread Tom Lane
"'Ben Grimm'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 15 Mar 2002, Tom Lane wrote: >> What's bug #3? I don't recall a third issue. > The problem I was seeing before is that when the postmaster was shutdown > properly, log_cnt in the sequence record was saved with whatever value it > had at the t

Re: [BUGS] Bug #613: Sequence values fall back to previously chec

2002-03-15 Thread 'Ben Grimm'
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002, Tom Lane wrote: > "'Ben Grimm'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > When these bugs are fixed there is still the issue of bug #3 that I > > came across. The one that I work around by resetting log_cnt to 0 when a > > backend initializes a sequence. It's this third bug that ma

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #613: Sequence values fall back to previously

2002-03-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > 2. I renamed XLogCtl->RedoRecPtr to SavedRedoRecPtr, and renamed > the associated routines to SetSavedRedoRecPtr/GetSavedRedoRecPtr, > in hopes of reducing confusion. Good. > 3. I believe it'd now be possible to remove SavedRedoRecPtr and > SetSavedRedoRecPtr/GetSavedRedoRecPtr

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #613: Sequence values fall back to previously

2002-03-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Attached is a patch against current CVS that fixes both of the known > problems with sequences: failure to flush XLOG after a transaction > that only does "SELECT nextval()", and failure to force a new WAL > record to be written on the first nextval after a checkpoint. > (The lat

Re: [BUGS] Bug #613: Sequence values fall back to previously chec

2002-03-15 Thread Tom Lane
Attached is a patch against current CVS that fixes both of the known problems with sequences: failure to flush XLOG after a transaction that only does "SELECT nextval()", and failure to force a new WAL record to be written on the first nextval after a checkpoint. (The latter uses Vadim's idea of l

Re: [BUGS] Bug #613: Sequence values fall back to previously chec

2002-03-15 Thread Tom Lane
"'Ben Grimm'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > When these bugs are fixed there is still the issue of bug #3 that I > came across. The one that I work around by resetting log_cnt to 0 when a > backend initializes a sequence. It's this third bug that made the other > two so apparent. Fixing them

[BUGS] Bug #620: create index ... (date_part('year', d)) fails

2002-03-15 Thread pgsql-bugs
Ernst Molitor ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 3 The lower the number the more severe it is. Short Description create index ... (date_part('year', d)) fails Long Description IMHO, creation of an index on a part of a date field should work, but it fails due to the definition

Re: [BUGS] Bug #613: Sequence values fall back to previously chec

2002-03-15 Thread 'Ben Grimm'
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002, Vadim Mikheev wrote: > > But sequences should not be under transaction control. Can you > > safely rollback a sequence? No! The only way to ensure that would > ... > > Placing a restriction on an application that says it must treat the values > > returned from a sequence a

Re: [BUGS] Bug #616: Alter table add foreign key

2002-03-15 Thread Stefano Reksten
At 07.24 15/03/02 -0500, you wrote: >I tried to execute following SQL alter table PRICEGROUP add FOREIGN >KEY ("PARENT") REFERENCES "PRICEGROUP" ON DELETE CASCADE > >this gives an error ALTER TABLE: column "PARENT" referenced in foreign key >constraint does not exist (7) while I'm sure that the

[BUGS] Bug #619: Not possible to specify foreign key name

2002-03-15 Thread pgsql-bugs
Dirk Jacobs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 2 The lower the number the more severe it is. Short Description Not possible to specify foreign key name Long Description It is not possible to specify a foreign key name. Version 7.2 on redhat 7.2 Sample Code No file was upload

[BUGS] Bug #618: Incorrect error codes

2002-03-15 Thread pgsql-bugs
Dirk Jacobs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 1 The lower the number the more severe it is. Short Description Incorrect error codes Long Description I tried some ODBC stuff. Here I've seen that the S result codes are not correct. Most of the time it simply return S1000 wh

[BUGS] Bug #617: In SQL the tableowner is not allowed

2002-03-15 Thread pgsql-bugs
Dirk Jacobs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 2 The lower the number the more severe it is. Short Description In SQL the tableowner is not allowed Long Description It seems that it is not allowed to specify the tableowner in an SQL statement Sample Code No file was uploaded

[BUGS] Bug #616: Alter table add foreign key

2002-03-15 Thread pgsql-bugs
Dirk Jacobs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 1 The lower the number the more severe it is. Short Description Alter table add foreign key Long Description I tried to execute following SQL alter table PRICEGROUP add FOREIGN KEY ("PARENT") REFERENCES "PRICEGROUP" ON DELETE CAS