Tom Lane wrote:
> Well, the case that is bothering me is stuff like
>
> (select '1' union select '1 ') union all select 2;
>
> The first union produces 1 row if you resolve the constants as
> integers, but 2 rows if you resolve as text, which I think is what
> the spec would expect here.
On 13/04/11 19:32, Tom Lane wrote:
"Jeff Wu" writes:
The UNION construct (as noted on this page:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/typeconv-union-case.html) will
cast unknown types to TEXT, however, if you try to do three or more UNIONs
the order in which the UNIONs are executed will ca
Mike Fowler wrote:
> SELECT 1,null,null
> UNION
> SELECT 2,3,null
> UNION
> SELECT 3,null,4
> In Oracle I get a delicious error message:
>
> Error: ORA-00923: FROM keyword not found where expected
For Oracle, shouldn't that be:
SELECT 1,null,null FROM DUAL
UNION
SELECT 2,3,null FROM DUAL
On 14/04/11 17:05, Kevin Grittner wrote:
SELECT 1,null,null FROM DUAL
UNION
SELECT 2,3,null FROM DUAL
UNION
SELECT 3,null,4 FROM DUAL
Sadly I can't profess to knowing Oracle, however if I run the query as
suggested I get:
1 | NULL | NULL
1 | |
2 |
Mike Fowler wrote:
> So to summarise, Oracle and PostgreSQL need minor tweaks to run
> cleanly and SQLServer and MySQL do not.
The FROM DUAL in Oracle has nothing to do with the issue at hand.
That is just because they always require a FROM clause on every
SELECT. DUAL is a special table wit
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 5979
Logged by: qintao
Email address: qin...@huaweisymantec.com
PostgreSQL version: 8.4.7
Operating system: windows server 2008
Description:postgres service cannot be started if database is
located in NAS
Detail
"Kevin Grittner" writes:
> Mike Fowler wrote:
>> So to summarise, Oracle and PostgreSQL need minor tweaks to run
>> cleanly and SQLServer and MySQL do not.
> That means that all three of the databases you tested have
> extensions to the standard similar to what is being contemplated for
> Postgr
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" writes:
>> That means that all three of the databases you tested have
>> extensions to the standard similar to what is being contemplated
>> for PostgreSQL.
>
> Uh, no, it proves they all extend the standard to allow NULL to be
> written without an immediate
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 5981
Logged by: Chris Price
Email address: cjpr...@bigpond.net.au
PostgreSQL version: 9.0.3
Operating system: Winders Server 2008 R2 Standard
Description:Attempt to install language pltcl fails on 64-bit
install
I've recently seen examples of star-like queries using vast amounts of
memory in one of our production systems. Here's a simplified example
using synthetic data (see attached to generate if desired):
SET geqo_threshold = 14;
SET from_collapse_limit = 14;
SET join_collapse_limit = 14;
EXPLAIN
S
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 5980
Logged by: M709199
Email address: m709...@yandex.ru
PostgreSQL version: 9.0.3-2
Operating system: Windows 7
Description:Installation can't running
Details:
account is an administrator
UAC is OFF
Firewall
11 matches
Mail list logo
