Re: [BUGS] BUG #8152: strange behavior regarding after triggers and inheritance

2013-05-13 Thread Hugo J. Curti
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 El 13/05/13 17:06, Tom Lane escribió: > hcu...@exa.unicen.edu.ar writes: >> PostgreSQL version: 8.4.17 > >> After statments triggers on child tables are sometimes executed and >> sometimes are not. As I far as I could see, when the after trigger is >>

Re: [BUGS] Odd Behavior After Multiple Deletes

2013-05-13 Thread Amit Kapila
On Sunday, May 12, 2013 9:40 PM Chaya Gilburt wrote: > Dear Sirs, > We are observing an odd phenomena with PostgresSQL, which is no doubt due to our using the database improperly.  That database in question is PostgresSQL Version 8.7.1 and runs on a machine installed > with Server 2003. The DELET

[BUGS] BUG #8156: PostGIS crash with immutable functions when immutable function throws an error

2013-05-13 Thread lr
The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 8156 Logged by: Regina Email address: l...@pcorp.us PostgreSQL version: 9.2.4 Operating system: Windows 7 64-bit compiled with visual c++ - EDB 64 Description: Nothing to do yet unless its obvious to you

Re: [BUGS] BUG #8152: strange behavior regarding after triggers and inheritance

2013-05-13 Thread Tom Lane
hcu...@exa.unicen.edu.ar writes: > PostgreSQL version: 8.4.17 > After statments triggers on child tables are sometimes executed and > sometimes are not. As I far as I could see, when the after trigger is > defined in only one of the tables it may not get executed, wether when it is > defined in ev

Re: [BUGS] Odd Behavior After Multiple Deletes

2013-05-13 Thread John R Pierce
On 5/12/2013 9:10 AM, Chaya Gilburt wrote: PostgresSQL Version 8.7.1 hopefully, you mean 8.1.7 ? there never was a 8.7 release, it went up to 8.4 then rolled over to 9.0 -- john r pierce 37N 122W somewhere on the middle of the left coast -- Sent via

[BUGS] BUG #8152: strange behavior regarding after triggers and inheritance

2013-05-13 Thread hcurti
The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 8152 Logged by: Hugo J. Curti Email address: hcu...@exa.unicen.edu.ar PostgreSQL version: 8.4.17 Operating system: Debian GNU/Linux 6.0.7 (squeeze) Description: I don't know if this is really a bug, but

[BUGS] Odd Behavior After Multiple Deletes

2013-05-13 Thread Chaya Gilburt
Dear Sirs, We are observing an odd phenomena with PostgresSQL, which is no doubt due to our using the database improperly. That database in question is PostgresSQL Version 8.7.1 and runs on a machine installed with Server 2003. The DELETE commands were being issued both from a Windows XP using

[BUGS] BUG #8151: client libraries not working on mingw-w64 gcc 4.8

2013-05-13 Thread antreimer
The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 8151 Logged by: Philip A Reimer Email address: antrei...@gmail.com PostgreSQL version: 9.2.4 Operating system: mingw-w64 Description: I'm getting this error when running psql compiled with gcc 4.8 but do

Re: [BUGS] BUG #8154: pg_dump throws error beacause of field called "new".

2013-05-13 Thread Willy-Bas Loos
oh, silly me. I was making a dump of a PostgreSQL 8.4.17 backend with pg_dump (PostgreSQL) 9.1.9 On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > willy...@gmail.com writes: > > pg_dump (PostgreSQL) 9.1.9 ends in an error when backing up my db, which > > contains a field called "new". > > Wor

Re: [BUGS] Inconsistency between TO_CHAR() and TO_NUMBER()

2013-05-13 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 13.05.2013 17:09, Tom Lane wrote: Heikki Linnakangas writes: Would it be possible to be lenient, and also accept . as the decimal separator, when there is no ambiguity? Ie. when . is not the thousands separator. I originally coded it that way, but concluded that it was probably a waste of

Re: [BUGS] BUG #8154: pg_dump throws error beacause of field called "new".

2013-05-13 Thread Tom Lane
willy...@gmail.com writes: > pg_dump (PostgreSQL) 9.1.9 ends in an error when backing up my db, which > contains a field called "new". Works for me: regression=# create table new (f1 text, new text); CREATE TABLE regression=# insert into new (f1, new) values ('1','2'); INSERT 0 1 regression=# cop

Re: [BUGS] Inconsistency between TO_CHAR() and TO_NUMBER()

2013-05-13 Thread Tom Lane
Heikki Linnakangas writes: > Would it be possible to be lenient, and also accept . as the decimal > separator, when there is no ambiguity? Ie. when . is not the thousands > separator. I originally coded it that way, but concluded that it was probably a waste of code space. How many locales can

[BUGS] BUG #8154: pg_dump throws error beacause of field called "new".

2013-05-13 Thread willybas
The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 8154 Logged by: Willy-Bas Loos Email address: willy...@gmail.com PostgreSQL version: 9.1.9 Operating system: ubuntu 12.04 server Description: pg_dump (PostgreSQL) 9.1.9 ends in an error when backing up m

[BUGS] BUG #8153: check constraint results in a lot of casts

2013-05-13 Thread marc
The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 8153 Logged by: Marc Mamin Email address: m...@intershop.de PostgreSQL version: 9.2.4 Operating system: Linux & windows Description: hello, This is not a functional bugs, but it appers (at least for me.

Re: [BUGS] Inconsistency between TO_CHAR() and TO_NUMBER()

2013-05-13 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 11.05.2013 01:17, Euler Taveira wrote: On 10-05-2013 13:09, Thomas Kellerer wrote: Tom Lane wrote on 10.05.2013 17:49: I looked into this, and find that the reason it misbehaves is that NUM_numpart_from_char() will treat a '.' as being a decimal point *without any regard to locale considerat