[BUGS] not sorted clustered index (8.2)

2007-11-05 Thread Adriaan van Kekem
hi, As part of the definition of a clustered index, the default sort of a table is based on the clustered index. In our application sometimes we see that the sort is invalid. Our table is like: iid identity (clustered primary key) data varchar if we do a query like: select * from table where i

Re: [BUGS] not sorted clustered index (8.2)

2007-11-05 Thread Stefan Kaltenbrunner
Adriaan van Kekem wrote: hi, As part of the definition of a clustered index, the default sort of a table is based on the clustered index. In our application sometimes we see that the sort is invalid. Our table is like: iid identity (clustered primary key) data varchar if we do a query like: s

[BUGS] BUG #3720: wrong results at using ltree

2007-11-05 Thread M. Palm
The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 3720 Logged by: M. Palm Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PostgreSQL version: 8.2.4 Operating system: Windows Server 2003 Web Edition Description:wrong results at using ltree Details: I think I found a bug in t

Re: [BUGS] BUG #3681: fillers are NULL in pgbench

2007-11-05 Thread Bruce Momjian
This has been saved for the 8.4 release: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold --- ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote: > > Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes

Re: [BUGS] Possible planner bug/regression introduced in 8.2.5

2007-11-05 Thread Greg Sabino Mullane
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 > Tom Lane wrote: >> Please try the attached patch (in addition to the one I sent earlier). > This is biting us too, quite badly. Any chance this can get pushed into a > 8.2.6? > Those patches are certainly already in the 8.2 CVS branch, so y

Re: [BUGS] Possible planner bug/regression introduced in 8.2.5

2007-11-05 Thread Tom Lane
"Greg Sabino Mullane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Tom Lane wrote: >> Those patches are certainly already in the 8.2 CVS branch, so your >> question seems to mean "are we going to push 8.2.6 immediately to fix >> this". My vote would be no --- 8.2.5 is less than six weeks old and > I suppose ca