On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 10:17:05PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I have seed database scripts quasi-generated from pg_dump which
> > include COPY statements, but the data is hard to edit (especially
> > cut & paste operations) when the COPY delimiter is some
David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have seed database scripts quasi-generated from pg_dump which
> include COPY statements, but the data is hard to edit (especially cut
> & paste operations) when the COPY delimiter is some non-visible
> character like \t.
This seems like an awfully weak
Folks,
This came up at work...
I have seed database scripts quasi-generated from pg_dump which
include COPY statements, but the data is hard to edit (especially cut
& paste operations) when the COPY delimiter is some non-visible
character like \t. So I thought it would be handy to be able to
con
Tom Lane wrote:
> Define "die quite nastily" ... you haven't really said what went wrong.
>
We lost data from this table, and ended up with transactions rolled back
that were in fact committed (ie. data was in DB, program code thought
they were rolled back).
End result was we deemed the databas
I just wasted a couple hours trying to determine why an EXEC_BACKEND
build would randomly fail on Fedora Core 4. It seems the reason is that
by default, recent Linux kernels randomize the stack base address ---
not by a lot, but enough to cause child processes to sometimes be unable
to attach to t
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I agree. Let's do the zeroing and see if people complain about it.
I'm complaining. Losing data on a cast is not common behavior.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9:
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 11:36:15AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
James William Pye wrote:
Why should initdb give it [processing
information] to the user if the user didn't request it in the first
place?
Because it shows important information that we want
On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 11:36:15AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> James William Pye wrote:
> > Why should initdb give it [processing
> > information] to the user if the user didn't request it in the first
> > place?
>
> Because it shows important information that we want the user to see.
Plus i
Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Without the flag, it's okay for cidr-to-inet to be a
> >> binary-compatible (no function) conversion. However, inet-to-cidr
> >> has to either zero out bits to the right of the netmask, or error out
> >> if any
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Without the flag, it's okay for cidr-to-inet to be a
>> binary-compatible (no function) conversion. However, inet-to-cidr
>> has to either zero out bits to the right of the netmask, or error out
>> if any are set. Joachim Wieland p
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
> > If all the -X flags come in a long form as well, then what use is the
> > -X at all? Why would one want to use -X disable-triggers instead of
> > --disable-triggers ?
>
> This was added before we had portable long options. I suppose we could
Tom Lane wrote:
> Without the flag, it's okay for cidr-to-inet to be a
> binary-compatible (no function) conversion. However, inet-to-cidr
> has to either zero out bits to the right of the netmask, or error out
> if any are set. Joachim Wieland posted a patch that makes the
> coercion function ju
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
If all the -X flags come in a long form as well, then what use is the
-X at all? Why would one want to use -X disable-triggers instead of
--disable-triggers ?
This was added before we had portable long options. I suppose we could
pha
Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
> If all the -X flags come in a long form as well, then what use is the
> -X at all? Why would one want to use -X disable-triggers instead of
> --disable-triggers ?
This was added before we had portable long options. I suppose we could
phase it out.
--
Peter Eisentraut
Bruce Momjian writes:
> I have the answer. Tru64 netdb.h has:
> #if defined (_SOCKADDR_LEN) || defined (_XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED)
> #define getaddrinfo ngetaddrinfo
> #else
> #define getaddrinfo ogetaddrinfo
> #endif
Seems like the same method we use for testing fini
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > I am not sure what to do on this. Right now we have a one-line test:
> > AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo])
> > To test for a macro we are going to need to add include netdb.h, and the
> > LINK test below is overkill. I am thinking we should just hard
Bruce Momjian writes:
> I am not sure what to do on this. Right now we have a one-line test:
> AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo])
> To test for a macro we are going to need to add include netdb.h, and the
> LINK test below is overkill. I am thinking we should just hard-code in
> HAVE_GETADDRINF
>>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 4:46 pm, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Kevin Grittner"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> (2) There should probably be some tests added to exercise these
> options.
Attached is a patch to address this one. Note that until psql is
fixed, this test will fail. I manua
I am not sure what to do on this. Right now we have a one-line test:
AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo])
To test for a macro we are going to need to add include netdb.h, and the
LINK test below is overkill. I am thinking we should just hard-code in
HAVE_GETADDRINFO for the True64 platform; an
Michael Fuhr wrote:
Rollback Mountain
A raw, powerful story of two young transactions, one serializable
and the other read-committed, who meet in the summer of 2005 updating
tables in the harsh, high-volume environment of a contemporary
online trading system and form an unorthodox yet session-lo
On Jan 25, 2006, at 9:29 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I wonder if this would be an opportunity to fix Postgres's
handling of
addresses like '10.1'.
You've mistaken this for a proposal to change the I/O behavior, which
it is specifically n
Andrew - Supernews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The spec is quite explicit that inet_pton is not expected to accept the
> abbreviated forms or any non-decimal values.
Hum. That distinctly doesn't match my memory but it seems you're right. The
spec mandates inet_ntoa and inet_addr support it but
I think we should pay attention to the sematic of table privs and column
privs.
Here is some examples.
1. role1 GRANT table priviledge SELECT on table S to role2.
role1 REVOKE column priviledge SELECT on column S(SNO) from role2.
2. deal with circles in GRANT graph.
"kevin brintnall" <[EMAIL
If we want to save the SQL statement for some database objects(table, view,
etc.),
the backend will see the same problem. Here is an example.
create table s(sno int, sname char(10)); select 1;
I recall that some DBMS will store the statement for table s like this:
create table s(sno int,
Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
> What use is the -X flag to pg_dump. The code say that if one add a setting
> "feature" to -X then there should also be a flag "--feature". So we have
> for example:
>
> -X disable-triggers
>
> and
>
> --disable-triggers
>
> If all the -X flags come in a long for
unsubscribe
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match
Robert Lor wrote:
> Bruce,
>
> The binary was compiled in 32bit mode using Sun Studio compiler, and we
> plan to do 64bit soon. Can you point me to the patch? We can certainly
> test it!
Download CVS HEAD and give it a try. The file that was created for the
port is backend/port/tas/solaris_x86
James William Pye wrote:
> Why should initdb give it [processing
> information] to the user if the user didn't request it in the first
> place?
Because it shows important information that we want the user to see.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
-
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
> What use is the -X flag to pg_dump?
Let me just state before someone else does, that I don't want to remove
-X. The question is if one should add new flags to it or simply just use
the long form for new ones.
--
/Dennis Björklund
What use is the -X flag to pg_dump. The code say that if one add a setting
"feature" to -X then there should also be a flag "--feature". So we have
for example:
-X disable-triggers
and
--disable-triggers
If all the -X flags come in a long form as well, then what use is the -X
at all? Why
30 matches
Mail list logo
