Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump / restore of empty database gives errors

2003-02-22 Thread Tom Lane
Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > ERROR: dependent privileges exist (use CASCADE to revoke them too) I saw that a couple weeks ago, and then was unable to reproduce it later (and still can't today). I suspect there may be some kind of uninitialized-variable bug, or something else with not

[HACKERS] pg_dump / restore of empty database gives errors

2003-02-22 Thread Rod Taylor
bash-2.05b$ ./psql newempty < file.txt SET You are now connected as new user rbt. SET REVOKE GRANT ERROR: dependent privileges exist (use CASCADE to revoke them too) The above is from the result of loading the attached file (empty database) into "newempty" which is a different empty database. -

Re: [HACKERS] TODO: DROP COLUMN .. CASCADE

2003-02-22 Thread Tom Lane
Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Require DROP COLUMN CASCADE for a column that is part of a multi-column > index > Do we want the same behaviour for PRIMARY KEY(col1, col2)? CHECK(col1 > > col2)? etc. as well? Personally I'm not sold on the sensefulness of the TODO item to begin with.

[HACKERS] TODO: DROP COLUMN .. CASCADE

2003-02-22 Thread Rod Taylor
Require DROP COLUMN CASCADE for a column that is part of a multi-column index Do we want the same behaviour for PRIMARY KEY(col1, col2)? CHECK(col1 > col2)? etc. as well? I'm thinking probably... -- Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP Key: http://www.rbt.ca/rbtpub.asc signature.asc Descripti

Re: [HACKERS] bug in contrib/adddepend

2003-02-22 Thread Rod Taylor
On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 22:08, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > Hi, > > I just noticed a bug in adddepend: > > The below commands will upgrade the foreign key style. Shall I execute > them? > > DROP TRIGGER "RI_ConstraintTrigger_1105102" ON news_authors; > DROP TRIGGER "RI_Constra

Re: [HACKERS] ILIKE

2003-02-22 Thread Peter Eisentraut
mlw writes: > I am not familiar with ILIKE, but I suspect that if people are moving > from a platfrom on which it exists, or even creatingmulti-platform > applications, there may be a substancial amount of code that may use it. But there are no other systems on which it exists. -- Peter Eisentr

Re: [HACKERS] ILIKE

2003-02-22 Thread Vince Vielhaber
On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, mlw wrote: > I am not familiar with ILIKE, but I suspect that if people are moving > from a platfrom on which it exists, or even creatingmulti-platform > applications, there may be a substancial amount of code that may use it. I don't know about other platforms but I've been

Re: [HACKERS] ILIKE

2003-02-22 Thread mlw
I am not familiar with ILIKE, but I suspect that if people are moving from a platfrom on which it exists, or even creatingmulti-platform applications, there may be a substancial amount of code that may use it. Peter Eisentraut wrote: AFAICT, ILIKE cannot use an index. So why does ILIKE even ex

Re: [HACKERS] regression failure - horology

2003-02-22 Thread Jeroen T. Vermeulen
On Sat, Feb 22, 2003 at 03:09:13AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > Mph. It fails for me too when I use --enable-integer-datetimes. Looks > like that patch still needs some work... Yeah. I'm really, really, *really* sorry for submitting it in the state it was in. I shouldn't have done that just bef

Re: [HACKERS] regression failure - horology

2003-02-22 Thread Tom Lane
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm seeing a regression failure on the horology test on two different > machines. I'd venture a guess that it is related to this change: >http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2003-02/msg00166.php It seems to be a problem with signed vs unsig

Re: [HACKERS] regression failure - horology

2003-02-22 Thread Tom Lane
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Hm, I just had regression tests pass earlier this evening on RHL 8.0 >> (also HPUX 10.20). Are you using default config, or >> --enable-integer-datetimes? > I'm using --enable-integer-datetimes on both. Mph. It fails for me too when I

Re: [HACKERS] regression failure - horology

2003-02-22 Thread Joe Conway
Tom Lane wrote: Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Sorry -- one is Red Hat 8.0/Intel P3 and one is Red Hat 7.3/AMD Athlon. Hm, I just had regression tests pass earlier this evening on RHL 8.0 (also HPUX 10.20). Are you using default config, or --enable-integer-datetimes? I'm using --enable-i

Re: [HACKERS] regression failure - horology

2003-02-22 Thread Tom Lane
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Sorry -- one is Red Hat 8.0/Intel P3 and one is Red Hat 7.3/AMD Athlon. Hm, I just had regression tests pass earlier this evening on RHL 8.0 (also HPUX 10.20). Are you using default config, or --enable-integer-datetimes? regards,

Re: [HACKERS] regression failure - horology

2003-02-22 Thread Joe Conway
Tom Lane wrote: Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I'm seeing a regression failure on the horology test on two different machines. Uh ... what machines, and what failure exactly? Sorry -- one is Red Hat 8.0/Intel P3 and one is Red Hat 7.3/AMD Athlon. Regression diff attached. Joe *** ./expe

Re: [HACKERS] regression failure - horology

2003-02-22 Thread Tom Lane
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm seeing a regression failure on the horology test on two different > machines. Uh ... what machines, and what failure exactly? regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Ha