Re: [BUGS] BUG #3110: Online Backup introduces Duplicate OIDs

2007-03-18 Thread Randy Isbell \(jisbell\)
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > BTW, the backup process is supposed to result in backup_label being > present in the filesystem dump, so that you'd have had to go out of your > way for it to NOT be present (which is why we didn't think it needed > much documentation). What exactly was happ

Re: [BUGS] Installation bug

2007-03-18 Thread Magnus Hagander
Алексей Опанасенко wrote: > I have a problem with installation of PostgreSQL 8.2. > Operating system - Windows 2000 Server. > I deleted the previous version (8.1) of PostgreSQL and tried to install > PostgreSQL 8.2 but at the end of installation there is an error: "failed > to create process for in

[BUGS] FDO Provider for ODBC

2007-03-18 Thread Bruna Schio
Hi! I am trying to use the FDO Provider for ODBC with my database (Postgis) in AutoDesk Map 3D 2007, but I am having a problem. I am sending a print Scrn of the error! I would like you help me. I used ODBC Postgre SQL ANSI. Bruna Schio Secretaria do Planejamento Municipal - SEPLAM Prefeitu

[BUGS] New role with password and error message

2007-03-18 Thread Ralf Bertelsmann
Dear developers, After installing PostgreSQL RDMS I had some dificuly on finding the information how build the initial user. Afterwards I wanted to enter more users and were show the below error message. [EMAIL PROTECTED] createuser -S -l -P -e annette Enter password for new role: Enter it aga

Re: [BUGS] BUG #3085: Performance BUG

2007-03-18 Thread Alexander Kirpa
On 1 Mar 2007, at 11:28, Tom Lane wrote: > "" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Description:Performance BUG > > You haven't actually shown us any bug. These are not the same query > and there's no reason to expect them to take the same amount of time. > >regards, tom lane > Hi, Tom!

Re: [BUGS] BUG #3085: Performance BUG

2007-03-18 Thread Tom Lane
"Alexander Kirpa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Sorry for long reply delay. > Yes. Both previous samples is different, > but I speak about incorrect planner work - see multiple 'aggregate'. > Try as alternative next sample: Well, I'm not sure I want to prevent the thing from flattening subqueries