Re: [HACKERS] Like vs '=' bug with indexing

2001-02-04 Thread Hannu Krosing
Tom Lane wrote: > > Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Also I remember being told that bytea _can_ hold embedded \0, no ? > > Yes. What has that got to do with text et al? > > >> Possibly chr() should reject chr(0) ... > > > > there is no function chr() at least in 7.0.2. > > I thi

Re: [HACKERS] Foreign Key Columns And Indices

2001-02-04 Thread Stephan Szabo
On Mon, 5 Feb 2001, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > Just a quick question, when a column of a table is defined to be a foreign > key, is it implicitly indexed, or does one still need to explicitly CREATE > INDEX? The foreign key columns are not currently implicitly indexed but you may wish to

Re: [HACKERS] Like vs '=' bug with indexing

2001-02-04 Thread Tom Lane
Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Also I remember being told that bytea _can_ hold embedded \0, no ? Yes. What has that got to do with text et al? >> Possibly chr() should reject chr(0) ... > > there is no function chr() at least in 7.0.2. I think it used to be called ichar(), but t

[HACKERS] Re: Very odd order by behavior - followup

2001-02-04 Thread Mitch Vincent
I found the problem. User error, it's been a long Sunday. Sorry! -Mitch - Original Message - From: "Mitch Vincent" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 11:00 PM Subject: Very odd order by behavior > FreeBSD 4.2, PostgreSQL 7.0.3 > > The attached

Re: [HACKERS] pg_ctl wish list

2001-02-04 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > To alleviate the need for a start up script somewhat we could perhaps fix > up pg_ctl to serve that purpose better. > -w should be the default, as has been suggested. Agreed. > "fast" shutdown should be the default, otherwise you may get surprises

[HACKERS] Very odd order by behavior

2001-02-04 Thread Mitch Vincent
FreeBSD 4.2, PostgreSQL 7.0.3 The attached file is the schema and data to the app_degrees table. Now check this out : select * from app_degrees gives (expected) : degree_id | abbr | description ---++-- 1818 | ACC

Re: [HACKERS] contrib

2001-02-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
> Is there a formal way of submiting something to the > contrib section of the distribution? Not really. Just throw it over to patches, and we will check it out. -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 853-3000 + If yo

[HACKERS] contrib

2001-02-04 Thread m w
Is there a formal way of submiting something to the contrib section of the distribution? __ Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

Re: [HACKERS] Foreign Key Columns And Indices

2001-02-04 Thread Roderick A. Anderson
On Mon, 5 Feb 2001, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > Just a quick question, when a column of a table is defined to be a foreign > key, is it implicitly indexed, or does one still need to explicitly CREATE > INDEX? I don't think you can actually declare the column in the table as a foreign key.

Re: [HACKERS] Foreign Key Columns And Indices

2001-02-04 Thread Philip Warner
At 11:01 5/02/01 +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: >Just a quick question, when a column of a table is defined to be a foreign >key, is it implicitly indexed, or does one still need to explicitly CREATE >INDEX? The referenced columns must be either a PK or the set of columns in a Unique const

[HACKERS] Comparison operators for bytea

2001-02-04 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
I notice that in 7.0.3 there are no '<' or '>' operators defined for the bytea type. Is this (should this be) fixed in 7.l? It just makes it impossible to do stuff like SELECT DISTINCT (byteafield), etc... The reason i'm trying to do this is I have written a query that discovers all the foreign

[HACKERS] Foreign Key Columns And Indices

2001-02-04 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Just a quick question, when a column of a table is defined to be a foreign key, is it implicitly indexed, or does one still need to explicitly CREATE INDEX? Chris -- Christopher Kings-Lynne Family Health Network (ACN 089 639 243)

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] syslog logging setup broken?

2001-02-04 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Nic Ferrier writes: > >Should I remove init.d from /contrib? > > I'm just a postgres user but I don't agree with Peter. I think the > file is valuable. I didn't say it wasn't valuable, I just said it didn't work... This problem seems to call for a more general solution than a handful of example

[HACKERS] pg_ctl wish list

2001-02-04 Thread Peter Eisentraut
To alleviate the need for a start up script somewhat we could perhaps fix up pg_ctl to serve that purpose better. -w should be the default, as has been suggested. "fast" shutdown should be the default, otherwise you may get surprises on system shutdown when users are still connected. There shou

Re: [HACKERS] Message of MOVE

2001-02-04 Thread Hannu Krosing
Kovacs Baldvin wrote: > > Hi! > > I would like to ask you, the developers about the following > question. > > Because I wanted to know after issuing a MOVE, that how many > steps did really happen, I made a patch, and now the backend > not only replies "MOVE" but "MOVE XXX", where XXX is the >

Re: [HACKERS] Like vs '=' bug with indexing

2001-02-04 Thread Hannu Krosing
Tom Lane wrote: > > Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Is there no simple (i.e. cheap) way to disallow \0 alltogether for > > these types then ? > > perhaps just strip them out in textin() (or is it text_in()) ? > > They *are* stripped out in textin(), by virtue of the fact that > tex

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] syslog logging setup broken?

2001-02-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
> Tom Lane writes: > > > Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > The example startup file is outdated and broken. Don't use it. > > > > Er ... shouldn't we fix it? Or remove it? > > See my message on -hackers, "Sparc/Linux patch" thing follow-up. > > The bottom line is that, IMHO,

[HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] syslog logging setup broken?

2001-02-04 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Tom Lane writes: > Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > The example startup file is outdated and broken. Don't use it. > > Er ... shouldn't we fix it? Or remove it? See my message on -hackers, "Sparc/Linux patch" thing follow-up. The bottom line is that, IMHO, writing a portable i

Re: [HACKERS] snapshots

2001-02-04 Thread Tom Lane
Kovacs Baldvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Could somebody explain me the mechanism in the backend, > which is responsible for the followings. (I tried to > look around snapshots, but couldnt figure out th answer). > In a transaction, isol. read comitted, a select from a > table can see the comi

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] A Sparc/Linux patch (for 7.1), and a Linuxrc.d/init.d script....

2001-02-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
> LOG="/usr/local/pgsql/server.log" > > Nor is > > su - postgres sh -c "$DAEMON stop >& /dev/null" Also, >& is not standard either. -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, |

Re: [HACKERS] Implementing an operator in C?

2001-02-04 Thread Tom Lane
Mario Weilguni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > float8 num3 = numeric_float8(num1); That won't work in the brave new world of 7.1 :-(. You need to do something like float8 num3 = DatumGetFloat8(DirectFunctionCall1(numeric_float8, NumericGet

Re: [HACKERS] Like vs '=' bug with indexing

2001-02-04 Thread Tom Lane
m w <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Inconsistent behavior indicates that a different > matching algorithm is used if one uses an index > instead of a table scan. That scares me. A seq scan and an index scan are inherently different algorithms, so I don't see exactly how you think we can avoid this

Re: [HACKERS] Like vs '=' bug with indexing

2001-02-04 Thread Tom Lane
Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Is there no simple (i.e. cheap) way to disallow \0 alltogether for > these types then ? > perhaps just strip them out in textin() (or is it text_in()) ? They *are* stripped out in textin(), by virtue of the fact that textin expects to see a null-termin

Re: [HACKERS] TODO list: Allow Java server-side programming

2001-02-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
> At 11:18 04/02/01 +0200, Hannu Krosing wrote: > >Peter Mount wrote: > > [snip] > > > > It's been a while since I delved into the backend, but unless it's changed > > > from fork() to threading, > > > >Someone posted here recently his port/tweaks of backend so that it used > >threads instead of

[HACKERS] snapshots

2001-02-04 Thread Kovacs Baldvin
Hello. Could somebody explain me the mechanism in the backend, which is responsible for the followings. (I tried to look around snapshots, but couldnt figure out th answer). In a transaction, isol. read comitted, a select from a table can see the comitted changes by others, but a previously decl

[HACKERS] Message of MOVE

2001-02-04 Thread Kovacs Baldvin
Hi! I would like to ask you, the developers about the following question. Because I wanted to know after issuing a MOVE, that how many steps did really happen, I made a patch, and now the backend not only replies "MOVE" but "MOVE XXX", where XXX is the number of steps. It needed only a few new l

[HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] A Sparc/Linux patch (for 7.1), and a Linux rc.d/init.dscript....

2001-02-04 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Ryan Kirkpatrick writes: > postgresql -> This is a Linux distribution independent (or so I > hope) init.d/rc.d script that makes use of pg_ctl. There is currently a > few in ./contrib/linux of the pgsql source tree, but they are RedHat > specific. This one is simple and self contained. Migh

Re: [HACKERS] Like vs '=' bug with indexing

2001-02-04 Thread m w
--- Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Should we not examine "the _possible_ outputs of > every C-coded function > to make sure it produces a valid value of the > datatype" ;) > > For me producing an invalid data for a datatype > seems very much like > a bug and it _should_ be reporte

Re: [HACKERS] configure problem with krb4 and ssl when compiling 7.1beta4

2001-02-04 Thread Jun Kuwamura
On Sat, 3 Feb 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Jun Kuwamura writes: > > > (1) KTH-KRB4(Kerberos4) require -lresolve to configure. > > Exact name of the symbol required? gcc testkrb.c -L/usr/athena/lib -lkrb -ldes 2>&1 \ | grep undef |cut -f5 -d' ' | uniq `dn_expand' `res_search' --

Re: [HACKERS] TODO list: Allow Java server-side programming

2001-02-04 Thread Peter Mount
At 12:36 03/02/01 -0500, Alex Pilosov wrote: >On Sat, 3 Feb 2001, Peter Mount wrote: [snip] > > I know some people think this would slow the backend down, but it's > > only the instanciation of the JVM thats slow, hence the other reason > > fork() is holding this back. Ideally you would want th

Re: [HACKERS] TODO list: Allow Java server-side programming

2001-02-04 Thread Peter Mount
At 17:56 03/02/01 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >Peter Mount writes: > > > Thats correct. Basically you are talking of something like PL/Java. The > > Java side would be simple, but its linking the JVM to the backend that's > > the problem. > >I've tried that recently, here's how it looks as far

Re: [HACKERS] TODO list: Allow Java server-side programming

2001-02-04 Thread Peter Mount
At 11:18 04/02/01 +0200, Hannu Krosing wrote: >Peter Mount wrote: [snip] > > It's been a while since I delved into the backend, but unless it's changed > > from fork() to threading, > >Someone posted here recently his port/tweaks of backend so that it used >threads instead of fork(). IIRC it was

[HACKERS] Implementing an operator in C?

2001-02-04 Thread Mario Weilguni
Sorry if I'm posting to the wrong list, if so, please could you point me to the correct list? Thanks! I'm trying to work with Access and Postgres as backend, but I often get errors like "unable to find an operator '=' for numeric and float" and such. Now I've implemented an operator in PLPGSQL

Re: [HACKERS] Like vs '=' bug with indexing

2001-02-04 Thread Hannu Krosing
Tom Lane wrote: > > m w <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I think this exposes a bug in postgres where either > > index or table scans (I'm not sure which just yet) > > treat a zero differently than a non-zero in a varchar. > > Embedded zeroes aren't supported in char/varchar/text fields, > and ca

Re: [HACKERS] TODO list: Allow Java server-side programming

2001-02-04 Thread Hannu Krosing
Peter Mount wrote: > > At 14:57 02/02/01 -0500, Alex Pilosov wrote: > >On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, tomasz konefal wrote: > > > > > could someone please clarify what "Allow Java > > > server-side programming" actually means? what are the > > > limitations of using java and jdbc with pgsql? > > > >It me