[BUGS] ERROR: cache lookup failed for function 0

2008-10-25 Thread David E. Wheeler
Howdy, I ran into this error on 8.2 a while ago, and just figured out what was causing it. Here's a quick example on 8.2: BEGIN; -- Compare name[]s more or less like 8.3 does. CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION namearray_text(name[]) RETURNS TEXT AS 'SELECT textin(array_out($1));' LANGUAGE sql IMMUT

Re: [BUGS] ERROR: cache lookup failed for function 0

2008-10-30 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Oct 25, 2008, at 05:35, Tom Lane wrote: Seems to be fixed in HEAD: regression=# SELECT '{foo}'::name[] <> '{bar}'::name[]; ERROR: operator is only a shell: name[] <> name[] LINE 1: SELECT '{foo}'::name[] <> '{bar}'::name[]; Great. Is it something that could be backported, or is it not wor

[BUGS] WARNING: uuid.h: present but cannot be compiled

2009-04-17 Thread David E. Wheeler
I'm building 8.4beta1 on Mac OS X 10.5.6. I have ossp-uuid installed with its includes in /usr/local/include/ossp-uuid. I'm building PostgreSQL like so: export CPPFLAGS="-I/usr/local/include/ossp-uuid" ./configure --with-libedit-preferred --with-bonjour --with-perl PERL=/ user/local/bin/perl

Re: [BUGS] WARNING: uuid.h: present but cannot be compiled

2009-04-17 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Apr 17, 2009, at 7:08 AM, Tom Lane wrote: "David E. Wheeler" writes: I'm building 8.4beta1 on Mac OS X 10.5.6. I have ossp-uuid installed with its includes in /usr/local/include/ossp-uuid. Well, then you would need --with-includes=/usr/local/include/ossp-uuid (don&#

Re: [BUGS] WARNING: uuid.h: present but cannot be compiled

2009-04-17 Thread David E . Wheeler
On Apr 17, 2009, at 10:21 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Apr 17, 2009, at 9:22 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote: So does it not know to look in /usr/local/include/ossp-uuid when it's looking for uuid.h? Tried a few more things. No matter where I put uuid.h, configure doesn't seem to

Re: [BUGS] WARNING: uuid.h: present but cannot be compiled

2009-04-17 Thread David E . Wheeler
On Apr 17, 2009, at 10:47 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Apr 17, 2009, at 10:21 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Apr 17, 2009, at 9:22 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote: So does it not know to look in /usr/local/include/ossp-uuid when it's looking for uuid.h? Tried a few more things. No m

Re: [BUGS] WARNING: uuid.h: present but cannot be compiled

2009-04-17 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Apr 17, 2009, at 11:08 AM, Tom Lane wrote: "David E. Wheeler" writes: I take that back. It can find it in the ossp subdirectiry, as RhodiumToad said, but it can't compile it: checking ossp/uuid.h usability... no checking ossp/uuid.h presence... yes configure: WARNI

Re: [BUGS] WARNING: uuid.h: present but cannot be compiled

2009-04-17 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Apr 17, 2009, at 11:28 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Dunno. Here's the log for the latest build: configure:13224: checking ossp/uuid.h usability configure:13241: gcc -no-cpp-precomp -c -O2 -Wall -Wmissing- prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif- labels -fno-strict-al

[BUGS] Termination When Switching between PL/Perl and PL/PerlU

2010-01-13 Thread David E. Wheeler
Found in 8.4.2, replicated in HEAD. Steps: 1. Create PL/Perl function. 2. Run it. 3. Create same function with PL/PerlU 4. Run it. 5. Create same function again with PL/Perl 6. Boom. Example on HEAD built today (ignore the error from the plperl version, that's the issue I'm trying to fix locally

Re: [BUGS] BUG #5277: plperl can't get args properly

2010-01-14 Thread David E . Wheeler
Tom Lane writes: > "louis" writes: > > Arguments can't be passed to a plperl function > > [ scratches head... ] Works for everybody else. I have to suppose > there's something broken about your libperl, or plperl somehow got > built wrong. How did you build or come by your copies of perl and

Re: [Tigerlead] [BUGS] BUG #5334: Version 2.22 of Perl Safe module breaks UTF8 PostgreSQL 8.4

2010-02-19 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Feb 18, 2010, at 10:09 AM, Tim Bunce wrote: > It took a depressingly large number of intense hours to work out what > was going on and then more to try to work out a relatively clean solution. > > The underlying problem is in perl and Safe but sadly there's no > reasonable way to fix Safe such

Re: [Tigerlead] [BUGS] BUG #5334: Version 2.22 of Perl Safe module breaks UTF8 PostgreSQL 8.4

2010-02-19 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Feb 19, 2010, at 1:13 AM, Tim Bunce wrote: >> Hrm. I don't have this bug with Safe 3.19, FWIW. > > That's because Safe 1.19 (which I presume you meant) doesn't execute > closures 'inside' the Safe compartment. So when the regex executes at > runtime the C code looks up the utf8::SWASHNEW metho

Re: [BUGS] New PL/Perl failure with Safe 2.2x due to recursion (8.x & 9.0)

2010-02-24 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Feb 24, 2010, at 7:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> ISTM the easiest and safest fix would be to not allow recursive plperl >> creations. You could still call plperl functions within functions, >> just not if they are not defined. This limitation really blows > > That's the understatement of the mon

Re: [BUGS] New PL/Perl failure with Safe 2.2x due to recursion (8.x & 9.0)

2010-02-25 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Feb 25, 2010, at 11:29 AM, Alex Hunsaker wrote: > Well that's the thing, probably by what I described below that. Namely > get something working for 9.1 and after we know its good and solid see > if we can back patch it. Unfeasible? If its really really simple and > straight forward maybe we

Re: [BUGS] New PL/Perl failure with Safe 2.2x due to recursion (8.x & 9.0)

2010-02-25 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Feb 25, 2010, at 10:01 AM, Tim Bunce wrote: >> That's two unacceptable alternatives, you need to find a third one. >> I think most people will have no trouble settling on "do not update >> to Safe 2.2x" if you don't offer a better solution than these. > > I believe the next version of Safe wil

Re: [BUGS] New PL/Perl failure with Safe 2.2x due to recursion (8.x & 9.0)

2010-02-25 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Feb 25, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Tim Bunce wrote: >> Which means losing sort $a <=> $b again, alas. Such was always the >> case in the past, so that might be an okay tradeoff to get recursive >> calls working again, but I certainly hope that Safe can be updated in >> the near future to give us both.

Re: [BUGS] New PL/Perl failure with Safe 2.2x due to recursion (8.x & 9.0)

2010-02-25 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Feb 25, 2010, at 1:08 PM, Alex Hunsaker wrote: >> That solves the problem with recursion or with $a and $b or both? > > Yes ATM because we only kick in the extra security if you are on > threads... Its a bit of a kludge in Safe. I know Tim wants to rectify > that... By adding the extra secur

Re: [BUGS] New PL/Perl failure with Safe 2.2x due to recursion (8.x & 9.0)

2010-02-25 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Feb 25, 2010, at 10:01 AM, Tim Bunce wrote: >> That's two unacceptable alternatives, you need to find a third one. >> I think most people will have no trouble settling on "do not update >> to Safe 2.2x" if you don't offer a better solution than these. > > I believe the next version of Safe wil

Re: [BUGS] BUG #5356: citext not acting like case insensitive search

2010-03-01 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Mar 1, 2010, at 9:15 AM, Michael Gould wrote: > > The following bug has been logged online: > > Bug reference: 5356 > Logged by: Michael Gould > Email address: mgo...@intermodalsoftwaresolutions.net > PostgreSQL version: 8.4.2 > Operating system: Windows 2008 R2 Server, W

Re: [BUGS] BUG #5356: citext not acting like case insensitive search

2010-03-01 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Mar 1, 2010, at 10:25 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Not sure if there is anything we can do to make this much nicer. > Removing the implicit cast seems like a cure worse than the disease, > particularly because it would result in throwing a "no such operator" > error rather than actually doing what Mic

Re: [BUGS] bug or regression in plpgsql vs word window, your choice

2010-03-16 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Mar 16, 2010, at 9:20 PM, Robert Treat wrote: > The problem is with the variable name window; once I changed it things worked > fine. Now, Window is supposed to be a reserved word, so I am not necessarily > expecting it to work any more, but this code works fine in 8.4., so I figured > I >

Re: [BUGS] BUG #3905: configure cannot find ossp UUID libs and/or includes

2008-01-28 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Jan 27, 2008, at 18:43, Tom Lane wrote: Oh, it finds it all right. It's just complaining (not incorrectly) that uuid.h fails when included after . AFAICT this is just cosmetic, since we don't use it that way. If you go ahead and build then everything should be fine. Hrm. It doesn't see

Re: [BUGS] BUG #3905: configure cannot find ossp UUID libs and/or includes

2008-01-28 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Jan 28, 2008, at 10:08, Tom Lane wrote: david=# select uuid_generate_v1(); ERROR: function uuid_generate_v1() does not exist Did you run the module's SQL script? It was not put into /usr/local/pgsql/share/contrib. Neither of these had any output: trigger% ll /usr/local/pgsql/share/co

Re: [BUGS] BUG #3905: configure cannot find ossp UUID libs and/or includes

2008-01-28 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Jan 28, 2008, at 13:52, Tom Lane wrote: Hmph ... works for me on a reasonably stock OS X 10.5.1 machine. You did do "make" and "make install" in the contrib subtree, right? No. I assumed that that's what --with-ossp-uuid would do for me. But yeah, that does work: trigger# cd postgresql-

Re: [HACKERS] Drop one-argument string_agg? (was Re: [BUGS] string_agg delimiter having no effect with order by)

2010-08-05 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Aug 5, 2010, at 11:25 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Applied to HEAD and 9.0. The mistaken case will now yield this: > > regression=# select string_agg(f1 order by f1, ',') from text_tbl; > ERROR: function string_agg(text) does not exist > LINE 1: select string_agg(f1 order by f1, ',') from text_tbl;

Re: [HACKERS] Drop one-argument string_agg? (was Re: [BUGS] string_agg delimiter having no effect with order by)

2010-08-05 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Aug 5, 2010, at 11:42 AM, Thom Brown wrote: >>> LINE 1: select string_agg(f1 order by f1, ',') from text_tbl; >>> ^ >> >> I'm confused: that looks like the two-argument form to me. Have I missed >> something? >> >>> HINT: No function matches the given name and argument types.

Re: [HACKERS] Drop one-argument string_agg? (was Re: [BUGS] string_agg delimiter having no effect with order by)

2010-08-05 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Aug 5, 2010, at 11:45 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I'm confused: that looks like the two-argument form to me. Have I missed >> something? > > Yeah, the whole point of the thread: that's not a call of a two-argument > aggregate. It's a call of a one-argument aggregate, using a two-column > sort key

Re: [HACKERS] Drop one-argument string_agg? (was Re: [BUGS] string_agg delimiter having no effect with order by)

2010-08-05 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Aug 5, 2010, at 12:16 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > HINT: No aggregate function matches the given name and argument > types. Perhaps you misplaced ORDER BY; ORDER BY must appear after all > regular arguments of the aggregate. +1 David -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org

[BUGS] BUG #5616: psql Doesn't Change Log files on \c

2010-08-12 Thread David E. Wheeler
The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 5616 Logged by: David E. Wheeler Email address: da...@kineticode.com PostgreSQL version: 8.4 Operating system: Mac OS X 10.6.4 Description:psql Doesn't Change Log files on \c Details: I have this

[BUGS] BUG #5846: Segfault Postgresql Built with --lib-libedit-preferred

2011-01-24 Thread David E. Wheeler
The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 5846 Logged by: David E. Wheeler Email address: da...@kineticode.com PostgreSQL version: 9.0.1 Operating system: Mac OS X 10.6.6 Description:Segfault Postgresql Built with --lib-libedit-preferred Details

Re: [BUGS] BUG #5846: Segfault Postgresql Built with --lib-libedit-preferred

2011-01-24 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Jan 24, 2011, at 3:49 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > This has been reported before, most recently last week. It's a libedit > bug (and yes it's been reported to Apple, but another complaint directed > there wouldn't hurt). Oh. I've probably complained to them myself. First noticed it quite some time