[BUGS] Performance and 72.devel

2001-09-17 Thread John Summerfield
I checked out the latest updates about 14 hours ago. I've also put together a new box, featuring an Athlon running at 1.3 Mhz. I cloned the OS (Red Hat Linux 7.1) - I'd copied it from one disk to another fairly recently, and so the software setup is pretty well precisely what I've been using al

Re: [BUGS] SQLCODE==-209

2001-09-17 Thread Peter Eisentraut
John Summerfield writes: > I don't normally have web access. You can download the built documentation from ftp://ftp.de.postgresql.org/pub/dev/doc/ Copy the files man.tar.gz and postgres.tar.gz into the doc/ directory of your source distribution and they will be installed automatically. > I'd

[BUGS] Bug #454: result of intersect depends on order?

2001-09-17 Thread pgsql-bugs
karl s.eiringer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 2 The lower the number the more severe it is. Short Description result of intersect depends on order? Long Description first at all - postgres:fabulous while concatenating queries in php there happend this strange error - it s

[BUGS] Bug #453:

2001-09-17 Thread pgsql-bugs
() reports a bug with a severity of 2 The lower the number the more severe it is. Short Description Long Description Sample Code No file was uploaded with this report ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with th

Re: [BUGS] dynamic-static date once again

2001-09-17 Thread Tom Lane
Thomas Lockhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I think we have agreed that 'current' is a Bad Idea and should be >> eliminated from the date/time datatypes... > I've started purging it from the timestamp code I'm working on for 7.2. Oh good. Let's not forget to review the pg_proc entries after

Re: [BUGS] Performance and 72.devel

2001-09-17 Thread Thomas Lockhart
... > I think that if it actually reused them instead of deleting old files... That is in fact what it does for at least the upcoming 7.2 release. - Thomas ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? htt

[BUGS] WAL Log numbering

2001-09-17 Thread Justin Clift
Hi guys, Running 7.1.3 on Mandrake Linux 8.0. Just noticed the numbering sequence which the WAL log used here was : DEBUG: MoveOfflineLogs: remove 00FA DEBUG: MoveOfflineLogs: remove 00FB DEBUG: MoveOfflineLogs: remove 00FC DEBUG: MoveOfflineLogs: remove