On 2005-10-26, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John R Pierce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> the whole DST thing falls apart when you deal with places that don't
>> respect it... arizona (except the navajo nation), for instance
>
>> it would be impossible to calculate the 'correct' answe
On 2005-10-26, Klint Gore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [sorry about the previous email, I quoted the wrong bit and clicked the
> wrong button]
>
> On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:41:54 -0400 (EDT), Bruce Momjian
> wrote:
>> test=> select
>> test-> ('2005-10-30 13:22:00-05'::timestamptz -
>> t
John R Pierce wrote:
> >>test=> select
> >>test-> ('2005-10-30 13:22:00-05'::timestamptz -
> >>test(> '2005-10-29 13:22:00-04'::timestamptz);
> >> ?column?
> >>--
> >> 25:00:00
> >>(1 row)
> >
> >
> > Is that actually the correct answer?
> >
> > Disregarding
I saw a lot of disussion because I forgot to specify that my tests were
for EST5EDT, but what about the use of interval_justify_hours() in
timestamp_mi(). Is this something we want to change?
---
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Klin
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 1999
Logged by: Seneca Cunningham
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.1beta4
Operating system: AIX 5.3
Description:contrib/spi doesn't receive the configured CFLAGS
Details:
After configurin
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 2001
Logged by: Telin Lin
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.0.4
Operating system: Red Hat Linux 3.2.3-47
Description:Signal 11 after concurrent inserts + updates
Details:
Hi,
My postgresq
Thanks, Tom!
I'll tackle this issue this weekend.
I'll also upgrade to PostgreSQL 8 (most probably)
Thanks once again for your comprehensive reply!
Best regards,
Ludmil Tinkov
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 5:34 AM
To: Ludmi
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 2000
Logged by: Todd
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.1 Beta 4
Operating system: Windows Xp home
Description:psql does not prompt for password
Details:
psql -U postgres does not prompt fo
Thanks for all this discussion, fixing, etc. I'm currently having
"issues" getting postgres' date/time functions to do what I want. You
have obviously spotted some of the reasons for this.
Many of my issues disappear when I use 8.1, but it's still in beta. Is
it safe for me to use 8.1 in pro
Bruce Momjian writes:
> I saw a lot of disussion because I forgot to specify that my tests were
> for EST5EDT, but what about the use of interval_justify_hours() in
> timestamp_mi(). Is this something we want to change?
It's too late to mess with it for 8.1, but see my previous message
proposing
Andrew - Supernews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Um, what? Under what conditions is it permissable for simple arithmetic on
> (only) timestamptz values (which may have originated in different timezones
> neither of which is the current one) to be dependent on the current timezone
> setting?
Timest
This is probably why the ANSI SQL standard specifies that
the way to get an INTERVAL from two timestamps is to subtract
them within parentheses follow that with interval_qualifier. Under
the standard you are required to SAY whether you want the
interval in days or hours, etc.
*interval_value_expr
Greetings,
Not entirely sure if this would be considered a 'bug' but it's
certainly annoying and creates some confusion. Basically, it's like
this:
test=> create table a (
test(> b int primary key
test(> );
NOTICE: CREATE TABLE / PRIMARY KEY will create implicit index "a_pkey"
"Seneca Cunningham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> $ cd postgresql-8.1beta4
> $ export OBJECT_MODE=64
> $ CFLAGS="-maix64 -Wl,-bbigtoc" ./configure
> --prefix=/opt/dbs/pgsql81b4-afilias-AIX53-2005-10-25
> --with-includes=/opt/freeware/include --enable-debug --enable-thread-safety
> --with-libraries=
"Telin Lin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My postgresql keeps crashing by signal 11 after a number of concurrent
> inserts + updates.
This could be due to corrupt data, or it could be a hardware problem ---
have you done any memory tests on that machine lately? If you can
pg_dump the table involv
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 09:27:52AM +0100, Telin Lin wrote:
> My postgresql keeps crashing by signal 11 after a number of concurrent
> inserts + updates.
Did you get a core dump? If so, can you get a stack trace from it?
In released versions of PostgreSQL core dumps are usually found
under the $PG
Tom Lane wrote:
"Seneca Cunningham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
$ cd postgresql-8.1beta4
$ export OBJECT_MODE=64
$ CFLAGS="-maix64 -Wl,-bbigtoc" ./configure
--prefix=/opt/dbs/pgsql81b4-afilias-AIX53-2005-10-25
--with-includes=/opt/freeware/include --enable-debug --enable-thread-safety
--with-li
Seneca Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I redid the build changing CFLAGS to "-maix64" and LDFLAGS to
> "-Wl,-bbigtoc", and gmake check still doesn't run without first
> modifying src/makefiles/Makefile.aix to add CFLAGS. The -maix64 from
> CFLAGS is required to get contrib/spi to build
Telin Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> the core dump filename should be just like 'coredump', right?
Probably either "core" or "core." kind of name. In existing
PG releases you'll usually find it under $PGDATA/base//
regards, tom lane
--
Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> test=> create table a (
> test(> bint primary key
> test(> );
> NOTICE: CREATE TABLE / PRIMARY KEY will create implicit index "a_pkey" for=
> table "a"
> CREATE TABLE
> test=> alter table a rename to c;
> ALTER TABLE
> test=> alter index a_pke
* Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > test=> create table a (
> > test(> b int primary key
> > test(> );
> > NOTICE: CREATE TABLE / PRIMARY KEY will create implicit index "a_pkey" for=
> > table "a"
> > CREATE TABLE
> > test=> alter table a r
Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> Arguably we should forbid ALTER INDEX RENAME on an index that belongs to
>> a constraint, and make you rename the constraint instead (and have that
>> implicitly change the index name too).
> That would work too,
On 2005-10-26, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew - Supernews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Um, what? Under what conditions is it permissable for simple arithmetic on
>> (only) timestamptz values (which may have originated in different timezones
>> neither of which is the current one) to
Andrew - Supernews wrote:
> On 2005-10-26, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Andrew - Supernews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Um, what? Under what conditions is it permissable for simple arithmetic on
> >> (only) timestamptz values (which may have originated in different timezones
> >> nei
24 matches
Mail list logo
