The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 5793
Logged by:
Email address: m...@instytut.com.pl
PostgreSQL version: 8, 9
Operating system: Linux
Description:tsquery error
Details:
The expression 'a & !(c) | a & b' is interpreted as '( a | !c ) & a & b'
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 12:56:12 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "H.Merijn Brand" writes:
> > On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 12:31:21 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> So what I'm thinking is happening is that libpq expects size_t as
> >> the argument type, but it's getting linked against a libc that
> >> expects int as t
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 02:25, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 12/15/10 4:58 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> > In any case, a doc patch would be the right thing for the back branches.
>>
>> I can look at this too (yes, I know we just wrapped, but I'm working
>> down the backlog :S). You mean something as s
On 17/12/2010 11:02 PM, Daniel Witkowski wrote:
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 5792
Logged by: Daniel Witkowski
Email address: daniel.witkow...@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 8.4, 9.0
Operating system: Windows XP
Description:INSTALLER FAILS!
"E.B Benoygopal" wrote:
> Description: Tables are not viewing through pgadmin
Since PostgreSQL itself is working as you expect, you might want to
ask on the support list for pgadmin: pgadmin-support
You might need to configure your search_path setting.
-Kevin
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs maili
"" writes:
> The expression 'a & !(c) | a & b' is interpreted as '( a | !c ) & a & b'.
> select 'a & !(c) | a & b'::tsquery;
> Subsequent "rewrites" of the same expression give inconsistent results:
> select '(a & !(c | d)) | (a & b)'::tsquery; -> 'a & !(c | d) | a & b'
> (correct)
> select 'a &
