Tom Lane wrote:
Thomas Hallgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Would such a patch be accepted?
Seems like a brute-force solution. I'd look first at whether
AtCommit_Portals could just restart its hashtable scan after
each deletion; if that seems too inefficient, modify the hash
table entries
First paragraph of section 17.4 (Privileges):
"When a database object is created, it is assigned an owner. By
default, only an owner (or a superuser) can do anything with the
object. In order to allow other users to use it, privileges must be
granted."
To me, that paragraphs says that only
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 1507
Logged by: Alexis Wilke
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.0.1
Operating system: Linux (not relevant)
Description:CREATE RULE commands atomicity
Details:
I read the page about CREATE R
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 1508
Logged by: Edward Jones
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.01
Operating system: XP Professional
Description:Install problem and workaround
Details:
Initial attempts at installing Postg
hi all!
i am using version 7.4.7/Debian of postgres.
as far as i understand the standard, the following situation should not
be possible. neither is it stated in the manual that the select is not
conforming to the standard.
i have the following data:
table L:
LNR ORT LCODE MENGE
L1
hi all!
sorry if you are recieving this twice, i amm too stupid to file a simple
bugreport (3rd!!! try already)
i am using version 7.4.7/Debian of postgres.
as far as i understand the standard, the following situation should not
be possible. neither is it stated in the manual that the select is
For what it's worth, this bug doesn't appear at all now that I've
upgraded to 8.0.1. Whatever bug tracking system you folks are using,
feel free to close this one.
Chris
--
Chris Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]www.cjones.org
PGP ID 5AFDD40A
---(
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 1509
Logged by: rafal
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.0.1
Operating system: windows 2003 server
Description:odbc driver
Details:
I have had installed version 7.3 of PostgreSQL server and
Tom Lane wrote:
"Sergey Koshcheyev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I'm trying to optimize "is null" queries, since PgSQL doesn't index null
values. I have found that creating an expression index on (column is null)
could work, but it doesn't get used unless the index expression is part of a
comparison
Thomas Hallgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Would such a patch be accepted?
Seems like a brute-force solution. I'd look first at whether
AtCommit_Portals could just restart its hashtable scan after
each deletion; if that seems too inefficient, modify the hash
table entries themselves to carry a
"Sergey Koshcheyev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> this is an addition to my bug report #1470. I have found that if I have a
> boolean column and create an index on it, it doesn't get picked up for
> conditions like "WHERE column" or "WHERE NOT column", only "WHERE column =
> true" or "WHERE column
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 1510
Logged by: Sergey Koshcheyev
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 7.4.7
Operating system: Debian Linux
Description:Indexes on boolean fields
Details:
Hi,
this is an addition to my bug rep
Andreas Pflug wrote:
Oliver Jowett wrote:
postgresbugs wrote:
The functionality provided by PGPASSWORD should not be removed unless
there is a functionality other than .pgpass, which is fine for some
uses and not for others, that will provide similar functionality.
That could be psql and pg_dump
Oliver Jowett wrote:
postgresbugs wrote:
The functionality provided by PGPASSWORD should not be removed unless
there is a functionality other than .pgpass, which is fine for some
uses and not for others, that will provide similar functionality. That
could be psql and pg_dump and the like accepti
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Thomas Hallgren wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
"Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
The hash_seq_search keeps track of what element that it should return next
in a HASH_SEQ_STATUS struct when it peruses a bucket. Removing that element
from the table won't change anything since the s
15 matches
Mail list logo