Re: [BUGS] BUG #5532: Valid UTF8 sequence errors as invalid

2010-07-06 Thread Dimitri Fontaine
Tom Lane writes: > (BTW, I should think that iconv or some related tool would have a > solution for fixing this miscoding; it's not an uncommon problem.) I guess recode is handling that. http://recode.progiciels-bpi.ca/manual/Universal.html#Universal Regards, -- dim -- Sent via pgsql-bugs

[BUGS] BUG #5542: Query optimization problem

2010-07-06 Thread Roman
The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 5542 Logged by: Roman Email address: zo...@oe-it.ru PostgreSQL version: 9.0 Operating system: Win7 x64 Description:Query optimization problem Details: I have a query: SELECT d1.ID, d2.ID FROM DocPrimary d1

[BUGS] ERROR: cannot handle unplanned sub-select

2010-07-06 Thread Merlin Moncure
Not 100% sure I have a bug, but I've never seen this before so I though it was worth a post. Confirmed on 8.4.4 and 9.0 beta. I have a small self contained test case that I can send off line or on the list following some code obfuscation (it's fairly complex to set up). merlin -- Sent via pgs

[BUGS] BUG #5543: Poor performance - Index scan backwards not used for order by desc with partitioned tables

2010-07-06 Thread Ranga Gopalan
The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 5543 Logged by: Ranga Gopalan Email address: ranga_gopa...@hotmail.com PostgreSQL version: 8.4.4 Operating system: Linux x86-64 Description:Poor performance - Index scan backwards not used for order by desc with

Re: [BUGS] ERROR: cannot handle unplanned sub-select

2010-07-06 Thread Tom Lane
Merlin Moncure writes: > Not 100% sure I have a bug, but I've never seen this before so I > though it was worth a post. Confirmed on 8.4.4 and 9.0 beta. So let's see the test case ... regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To

Re: [BUGS] BUG #5542: Query optimization problem

2010-07-06 Thread Craig Ringer
On 06/07/10 14:43, Roman wrote: > > The following bug has been logged online: > > Bug reference: 5542 > Logged by: Roman > Email address: zo...@oe-it.ru > PostgreSQL version: 9.0 > Operating system: Win7 x64 > Description:Query optimization problem > Details: On the

[BUGS] Negative result with (now()-previously_inserted_timestamp)

2010-07-06 Thread Gurjeet Singh
I have an IRC logger storing its data in a Postgres 8.3.3. The table in question has the interesting column declared as: time timestamp with time zone default now() The logger uses a prepared statement to insert data, and does not mention this column in the INSERT statement, hence the assumption

Re: [BUGS] Negative result with (now()-previously_inserted_timestamp)

2010-07-06 Thread Tom Lane
Gurjeet Singh writes: > I ran the following query, and got an unexpected negative value. Does this > imply that SELECT-transaction was able to see a row created by > INSERT-transaction which started after the SELECT-transaction? Was the SELECT inside a BEGIN block? regard

Re: [BUGS] Negative result with (now()-previously_inserted_timestamp)

2010-07-06 Thread Gurjeet Singh
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 12:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Gurjeet Singh writes: > > I ran the following query, and got an unexpected negative value. Does > this > > imply that SELECT-transaction was able to see a row created by > > INSERT-transaction which started after the SELECT-transaction? > > Was

Re: [BUGS] Negative result with (now()-previously_inserted_timestamp)

2010-07-06 Thread Gurjeet Singh
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 12:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Gurjeet Singh writes: > > I ran the following query, and got an unexpected negative value. Does > this > > imply that SELECT-transaction was able to see a row created by > > INSERT-transaction which started after the SELECT-transaction? > > Was