Edmund Dengler wrote:
> Is the rewrite only for the literal 'X = NULL' or will it do a test
> against a value such as 'X = OLD.X' (and rewrite is OLD.X is NULL)?
It is a parse time transformation:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&frame=right&th=26ef31219ae11442&seekm=3
Phil Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm still getting lots of SMTP hits from varying servers attempting to
> deliver mail to my tagged email address, used only for subscribing to
> this list.
The postgresql.org servers were moved to new IP addresses today. It
looks like the reverse DNS mapp
> Tom Lane writes:
>> ... That is upper() doesn't work correctly after plperlu function
>> call.
Tom> It sounds like Perl is taking it on itself to change the
Tom> process' LC_CTYPE settings. That's very nasty of it :-(. Can
Tom> anyone confirm that libperl does such things, or find a
I'm still getting lots of SMTP hits from varying servers attempting to deliver
mail to my tagged email address, used only for subscribing to this list. The
delivery attempts are using the same envelope sender address style as is used
by the list itself. But is this real mailing list attempts from
Is the rewrite only for the literal 'X = NULL' or will it do a test
against a value such as 'X = OLD.X' (and rewrite is OLD.X is NULL)?
Is there any way to match NULLS to each other (as I am looking for a
literal row, not using NULL as the UNKNOWN). I suppose I could put in a
dummy value for the '
Name:svr3.postgresql.org
Address: 200.46.204.161
Aliases: gborg.postgresql.org
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Patrick Welche wrote:
> Is something up with gborg cvs, or have the settings changed?
>
> % cvs update
> cvs [update aborted]: connect to gborg.postgresql.org:2401 failed: Connection timed
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 21:16:33 -0400,
Edmund Dengler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I think if I could do a 'SET TRANSFORM_NULL_EQUALS TO ON' then this might
> fix the issue (don't know, haven't tried it yet). My question is: can this
> be done within a function such that at the end of the fun
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 13:49:07 -0700,
Patrick Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a timestamp field where I find I'm doing a lot of searching by date
> (-MM-DD) or using this field as a match to another table that has a
> date format. I wanted to create an index on the timestamp f
Tom Lane wrote:
> "D. Stimits" writes:
>
> >... My question is, where the heck is
> >CurrentMemoryContext and MemoryContextAlloc provided as an
> >implementation which I can link with?
>
>
> They're inside the backend, and you don't --- you are not trying to
> build a standalone executable with n
Hi all!
I am doing some trigger functions that need to find a tuple in another
table. The problem is that this second table is doing some summarization
work, and I need nulls to equal each other.
Basically, in the trigger I do a:
SELECT INTO ... x
FROM table1
WHERE ...(some straightforward
Vivek Khera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think it is a timing issue. The PG has no way to notify the OS that
> it has finished exiting, so if it takes a long time to exit, the OS
> will ungracefully kill the DB process(es). Doesn't matter what DB (or
> any other application) you're running, yo
Gordon Luk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes, HKSCS just an extension of Big5, if pgsql could support natively,
> that is lovely. :-{}
Presumably you could extend the existing big5 support, then. See
src/backend/utils/mb/conversion_procs/utf8_and_big5/
regards, tom lane
Sean Chittenden wrote:
> > I don't think that really answers my concern, since the sort of
> > folks who are likely to get confused by not being able to see
> > something that should be there are exactly the same ones who are not
> > likely to have turned on a non-default "power user" setting. If
Sergey Suleymanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ... That is upper() doesn't work correctly
> after plperlu function call.
It sounds like Perl is taking it on itself to change the process'
LC_CTYPE settings. That's very nasty of it :-(. Can anyone confirm
that libperl does such things, or fin
Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> If we were going to do that I think we'd be better off making a new
>> type and leaving "char" alone.
> You won't hear any disagreements from me on this one. I've
> sufficiently abused "char" as a 1 byte storage field and would love to
> see an int1
Hi Tino,
--- Tino Wildenhain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Link wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Here's a Conditional drop_table func for those interested. There
> was a
> > thread on this a long time back.
> >
> > We do this all the time :
> >
> > DELETE TABLE sales;
> > CREATE TABLE sales
Patrick Welche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is something up with gborg cvs, or have the settings changed?
Works here. Probably your DNS server still has the old IP address
cached. All the Postgres servers were moved to new IP addresses today.
regards, tom lane
Hi
> When you have postgresql support compiled into PHP, then PHP
connects
> directly using native PostgreSQL calls (libpq), no ODBC layer to
deal
> with.
Working with Windows you normally don't compile PHP but use the Win
binaries. To connect to a PostgreSQL database you must uncomment the
php_pg
On Mon, 2003-10-13 at 17:37, Gene Vital wrote:
> Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
> > I don't see how ODBC fits in to this at all. There is no need for ODBC
> > if postgresql is running via cygwin, running on a remote linux box, or
> > even native on windows.
>
> I am new to PostgreSQL
> what other opt
Is something up with gborg cvs, or have the settings changed?
% cvs update
cvs [update aborted]: connect to gborg.postgresql.org:2401 failed: Connection timed out
% cat CVS/Root
:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/cvsroot/libpqxx
% cat CVS/Repository
libpqxx
Cheers,
Patrick
-
El Lun 13 Oct 2003 11:38, Tom Lane escribió:
> Alex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The LD_LIBRARY_PATH actually points to the library, I am even able to
> > execute the initdb but the postmaster always fails
>
> In that case, almost certainly, the environment you are starting the
> postmaster in i
Mat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 17:50, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, it seems to be running at about 5 msec/row, which would be quite
>> respectable if each fetch required another disk seek. I'm wondering why
>> you are (apparently) not managing to get more than one row per page
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Dennis Gearon writes:
>
>
>>How soon will 7.5 come out? (yes, I know, 7.4 is beta right now).
>
>
> All signs point to September 24, 2004.
Have you verified that with the Master of Ceremonies?
Mike Mascari
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broa
Harry Broomhall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>I'm not entirely sure how I would do this, as the 'lookup' is actualy
> a join. I thought that the order of nameing the joined tables didn't
> matter (except for 'left' and 'right'), similar to the fact that 1 + 2 is
> the same as 2 + 1.
Outer jo
Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
I don't see how ODBC fits in to this at all. There is no need for ODBC
if postgresql is running via cygwin, running on a remote linux box, or
even native on windows.
I am new to PostgreSQL
what other options are available to connect then ?
--
Eugene Vital
Any technolog
Dennis Gearon writes:
> How soon will 7.5 come out? (yes, I know, 7.4 is beta right now).
All signs point to September 24, 2004.
> How difficult is it to set up cygwin?
I found it quite easy.
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)--
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > Looking at explain.c, it is only timing the executor part in
> > > > ExplainOnePlan(). The planner() call is outside that loop, so it must
> > > > be parse/plan, though that seems like a lot of time spent in that area.
As I posted separately th
On Mon, 2003-10-13 at 17:10, Dennis Gearon wrote:
> How soon will 7.5 come out? (yes, I know, 7.4 is beta right now).
Who knows... six months maybe?
> How difficult is it to set up cygwin?
Not very, I used postgres via cygwin for development for a long time.
Works fine, but it's slower and not
I have a timestamp field where I find I'm doing a lot of searching by date
(-MM-DD) or using this field as a match to another table that has a
date format. I wanted to create an index on the timestamp field using a
date format. Is this possible? I tried:
CREATE INDEX test_2 ON table1 USING
How soon will 7.5 come out? (yes, I know, 7.4 is beta right now).
How difficult is it to set up cygwin?
I'd like to make a drop in Apache/Postgres/PHP application on a windows
computer for someone in my organization.
I'd PREFER to avoid ODBC if at all possible.
---(end
> >> I dislike putting random restrictions on what the \d displays
> >> will show. We have done this in the past (eg, \df doesn't show
> >> things it thinks are I/O functions) and by and large it's been a
> >> mistake; I think it's created more confusion than it's prevented.
>
> > Hrm... psql's
Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I dislike putting random restrictions on what the \d displays will
>> show. We have done this in the past (eg, \df doesn't show things it
>> thinks are I/O functions) and by and large it's been a mistake; I
>> think it's created more confusion than it
> > Why wouldn't you want to hide pg_temp_*?
>
> So you could see your own temp tables, for instance.
>
> I dislike putting random restrictions on what the \d displays will
> show. We have done this in the past (eg, \df doesn't show things it
> thinks are I/O functions) and by and large it's bee
33 matches
Mail list logo
