Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> This is not a bug, this is a definitional disagreement, and your TODO
>> entry presupposes an answer that I don't particularly agree with.
> Well, our documentation suggests thaat [1] is the same as [1:1]:
> http://www.postgresql
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I can confirm this is a bug. Added to the TODO list:
> > o ARRAY[[1,2],[3,4]])[1] should return the same values as
> > ARRAY[[1,2],[3,4]])[1:1];
>
> This is not a bug, this is a definitional disagreement, and your T
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I can confirm this is a bug. Added to the TODO list:
> o ARRAY[[1,2],[3,4]])[1] should return the same values as
> ARRAY[[1,2],[3,4]])[1:1];
This is not a bug, this is a definitional disagreement, and your TODO
entry presupposes an ans
I can confirm this is a bug. Added to the TODO list:
o ARRAY[[1,2],[3,4]])[1] should return the same values as
ARRAY[[1,2],[3,4]])[1:1];
---
Roman Nowak wrote:
>
> The following bug has been logged onli
"Sergiy Vyshnevetskiy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Possible reason is forgotten SPI_push()/SPI_pop() wrapper in domain check
> evaluation algorithm.
I think it's really plpgsql's fault, not the domain code. Try this patch:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2007-01/msg00405.php
Th
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
Sergiy Vyshnevetskiy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
This hack makes SPI_pusn()/SPI_pop() wrapper optional.
We are *certainly* not fixing it like that.
And you shouln't, unless you are thinking of making SPI_pusn()/SPI_pop()
wrapper optional - a topic for -
Sergiy Vyshnevetskiy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This hack makes SPI_pusn()/SPI_pop() wrapper optional.
We are *certainly* not fixing it like that.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the post
Ok. Right after I posted I noticed this:
"It is important to know that CURRENT_TIMESTAMP and related functions return
the start time of the current transaction; their values do not change during
the transaction. This is considered a feature: the intent is to allow a
single transaction to have a
This is in version 8.1.4.
I've noticed what seems to be a strange behavior - it may be by design, but
I figured I'd ask.
Run this simple test function:
create or replace function test() RETURNS bool AS '
begin
raise notice ''%'',now();
for i IN 0..5000 lo
Hackaround attached.
This hack makes SPI_pusn()/SPI_pop() wrapper optional.--- src/backend/executor/spi.c.orig Fri Jan 26 13:12:50 2007
+++ src/backend/executor/spi.c Tue Jan 30 12:42:56 2007
@@ -64,16 +64,6 @@
{
int newdepth;
- /*
- * When procedure called by Executor _SPI_curid expected
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 2945
Logged by: Sergiy Vyshnevetskiy
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.2.1
Operating system: FreeBSD-6 stable
Description:possibly forgotten SPI_push()/SPI_pop()
Details:
Preparation:
#ps
11 matches
Mail list logo
