Hello!
I would like to ask your opinion and about your intuitions
on the question: is it secure to use the cvs version
of postgres instead of 7.1? (The more specific question
is below...)
Sorry for enlarging the traffic of th elist with this
possibly non-interesting question.
To be more precise
Hi everybody!
I tried, and it works: the current CVS version really runs
happily the query what sent to heaven our 7.1 version of the
backend.
Kevin: your original complex schema also runs smoothly.
Thanks for our mindful developers!
Regards,
Baldvin
I think Jan wrote:
> Sorry, I missed
-- Hi Kevin, and everyone!
--
-- I don't think that I only found a minor bug compared to
-- the other you wrote in your last letter: the backend crash
-- is caused by the same CHECK constraint in the child table.
--
-- However, for you without time to analyzing Kevin's huge
-- scheme, here is th
Hello (mainly developer) folks!
Probably Kevin really found a bug.
When I saw his words in $50, I immediately started to look around his
problem... You probably don't think that as a student here, in Hungary I
live half a month for $50 :-
So I simplified his given schema as much as I needed
Hi!
I had very funny problems with "make install" of the
CVS version. The clue was a bit strange behavior of bash
(/bin/sh is only a link in my debian).
The whole thing is about wildcard expansion: there's an
option called nocaseglob. I never heard of it before,
but this was the cause for th
Hi.
A few weeks (months?) ago I made a patch to the postgres
backend to get back the number of realized moves after
a MOVE command. So if I issue a "MOVE 100 IN cusrorname",
but there was only 66 rows left, I get back not only "MOVE",
but "MOVE 66". If the 100 steps could be realized, then
"MOVE
Hello
A few weeks ago I was interested in this question. My results were:
- Yes, this is a sorrowful but true fact that if you enable access to
someone to a database, she is automatically enabled to create
objects in it.
- Yes, the developers know it, and they said: there is a patch existing
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
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
