At 23:20 14/10/00 -0700, Stephan Szabo wrote:
>
>Well, actually the question of whether failing referential actions
>due to permission deficits of the user doing the delete/update
>on the pk table is a bug or feature still stands. It would be
>fairly trivial to extend Peter's patch to effectively
POSTGRESQL BUG REPORT TEMPLATE
Your name : Lennert Buytenhek
Your email address : [EM
Hi!
I have seen this problem on several occasions, using 7.02:
# vacuum;
NOTICE: mdopen: couldn't open at_provider_user_info: No such file or directory
NOTICE: RelationIdBuildRelation: smgropen(at_provider_user_info): No such file or
directory
NOTICE: mdopen: couldn't open at_provider_user_i
Yeah, that's a known bug :-(. The indexing routines for CIDR/INET don't
agree with the comparison operators about sort order. It'll be fixed in
7.1.
regards, tom lane
Palle Girgensohn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> BEGIN;
> BEGIN
> ALTER TABLE at_provider_user_info RENAME TO tmp;
> NOTICE: Caution: RENAME TABLE cannot be rolled back, so don't abort now
> [ followed by deliberately-provok
Gert Pache ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 3
The lower the number the more severe it is.
Short Description
INSERT possible without INSERT-permission
Long Description
Although a user without has only UPDATE/DELETE-permissions on a table he can insert
into the table.
Version
Gert Pache ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 1
The lower the number the more severe it is.
Short Description
permission-error in tables with referential integrity
Long Description
Suppose you have a table A, which no user should be able to alter
Table B is a table, the user to
The programmers guide states that in order to load the JDBC
driver, you use the class name "postgresql.Driver"
http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.0/programmer/jdbc6424.htm
This is only true if you compile the driver to use the 1.1
JDK; if you compile it to use the 1.2 jdk the class wi
Hmmm... is this bad?
ulsec=# truncate job;
NOTICE: Buffer Leak: [002] (freeNext=-3, freePrev=-3, relname=job, blockNum=0,
flags=0xc, refcount=1 -1)
TRUNCATE
ulsec=#
Lennert Buytenhek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ulsec=# truncate job;
> NOTICE: Buffer Leak: [002] (freeNext=-3, freePrev=-3, relname=job, blockNum=0,
> flags=0xc, refcount=1 -1)
> TRUNCATE
Hmm, that's interesting. It shouldn't be possible for PrivateRefCount
(the last value printed) to become
At 12:41 15/10/00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>Making ALTER TABLE RENAME abort-safe requires changing the conventions
>for naming physical table files, and the details have been sufficiently
>controversial that it's not been done yet. In the meantime our only
>choices are to forbid ALTER TABLE RENAM
Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> NOTICE: Caution: beyond this point, a mis-spelled attribute name will
> corrupt your database
How many distinct kinds of typos do you think the message should
mention? I'd think something like that would be more confusing
than not, since it implie
At 21:41 15/10/00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> NOTICE: Caution: beyond this point, a mis-spelled attribute name will
>> corrupt your database
>
>How many distinct kinds of typos do you think the message should
>mention? I'd think something like that wo
Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Er...it was a joke.
My mistake, missed the smiley :-(
>> Personally, I'd vote for disallowing ALTER RENAME inside transaction
>> blocks until we can do it safely.
> I agree totally.
Well, does anyone want to re-open the issue? ALTER TABLE RENAME an
Thanks. Docs updated.
> The programmers guide states that in order to load the JDBC
> driver, you use the class name "postgresql.Driver"
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.0/programmer/jdbc6424.htm
>
> This is only true if you compile the driver to use the 1.1
> JDK; if you comp
15 matches
Mail list logo
