techi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 2
The lower the number the more severe it is.
Short Description
bugs "create user" "alter user"
Long Description
I think i have found a bug . I am using PostgreSQL 7.3.2 on a
platform WindowsXP under cygwin. And the bug looks like
I have had a lot of trouble getting a DELETE
trigger to do nothing (ie let the delete operation occur instead of cancelling
it, as required)
The documentation on this is very thin on the
ground - I`ve just spend 4 Hours googling and the best I could find was one of
the main developers (Bru
"Mathew Frank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The documentation on this is very thin on the ground - I`ve just spend 4 Ho=
> urs googling and the best I could find was one of the main developers (Bruc=
> e?? sorry - too long ago) replying to an email in 2001.Which was to NOT=
> cancel the delet
On Thu, 3 Apr 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> techi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 2
> The lower the number the more severe it is.
> (FIRST METHOD)
> CREATE USER Michael ;or CREATE DATABASE school ;
> The output is for both commands : PERMISSION DENIED
>
DB appears to be corrupted but cannot isolate cause, it has happened
multiple times after recreating database. The system seems stable otherwise
The message when trying to do
psql name_of_database:
NOTICE: RelationBuildDesc: can't open pg_statistic: No such file or
directory
ERROR: cannot open p
hello
I think i have found a bug . I am using PostgreSQL 7.3.2 on a
platform WindowsXP under cygwin. And the bug looks like :
As a superuser i make a new user called "Paul" with a command :
CREATE USER techi ;
and that's ok , when i change user , and i am as Paul trying to
Hi,
What follows is not necessarily a bug, but may be a misinterpretation of
the SQL standard. I don't actually have a copy of the SQL standard, but I
am working from the book "A Guide to The SQL Standard, Fourth Edition" by
C.J. Date and Hugh Darwen. If you have this book handy, please refer to
Chris Studholme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What follows is not necessarily a bug, but may be a misinterpretation of
> the SQL standard.
Yeah, it's a bug; the implementation of row comparisons in PG is
completely bogus. (The parser just expands it out to an AND clause
of scalar comparisons, whi
Raouf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 2
The lower the number the more severe it is.
Short Description
some system tables are not accessible
Long Description
Platform: Windows 2ooo professional workstation
posgresql : PgSQL731wina1.exe
postgresql version: PostgreSQL 7.3.1 on
On Thu, 3 Apr 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Raouf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 2
> The lower the number the more severe it is.
>
> Short Description
> some system tables are not accessible
>
> description:
> Some system tables are not accessible, for instance:
> 1- pg_us
Hello Bugs,
a query that uses pattern matching like this:
SELECT .. WHERE ( (content || authorname) ~* ( '.*gesellschaft.* |
.*wirtschaft.*' ) )
produces an error 'Query was cancelled' - sometimes, depending on the
search words.
Seems quite strange to me, I increased some postgresql.conf para
Bernd von den Brincken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> a query that uses pattern matching like this:
>SELECT .. WHERE ( (content || authorname) ~* ( '.*gesellschaft.* |
> .*wirtschaft.*' ) )
> produces an error 'Query was cancelled' - sometimes, depending on the
> search words.
That's really,
Hello Tom,
At 04.04.2003 00:22, you wrote:
Bernd von den Brincken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> a query ... produces an error 'Query was cancelled' -
> sometimes, depending on the search words.
That's really, really hard to believe. I suspect you've mis-analyzed
the situation. You sure your clie
> "Mathew Frank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The documentation on this is very thin on the ground - I`ve just spend 4
Ho=
> > urs googling and the best I could find was one of the main developers
(Bruc=
> > e?? sorry - too long ago) replying to an email in 2001.Which was to
NOT=
> > cancel
Bernd von den Brincken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My client is psql via telnet on a Toshiba T550 laptop, my version():
>PostgreSQL 7.3.2 on i386-portbld-freebsd4.7, compiled by GCC 2.95.4
> Now I tested it on a different machine (P-3 Server) with (almost) the same
> DB contents - it works fi
"Mathew Frank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> and the result of a delete query:
> NOTICE: Operation NOT cancelled
> ERROR: fmgr_info: function 1455898: cache lookup failed
> (I was sure I was getting a 'Delete 0' but since my computer has crashed
> since - I`m not sure. Maybe I was gett
Mark Pether ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 2
The lower the number the more severe it is.
Short Description
Too many inserts crash server
Long Description
If I create an external C function consisting of a
simple loop that inserts 25 records into a table
the server proce
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> If I create an external C function consisting of a
> simple loop that inserts 25 records into a table
> the server process eventually crashes.
The memory leak goes away if you add
SPI_freetuptable(SPI_tuptable);
after the SPI_exec() call.
I am not sure w
18 matches
Mail list logo
