Re: [HACKERS] SQL99 ARRAY support proposal
Tom Lane wrote:
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
select ARRAY[1,2,3];
result '{1,2,3}'
The array type is determined how? I'd like this syntax better if there
were a way to force the choice of array type...
What about:
select integer ARRAY[1,2,3];
result '{1,2,3}'::integer[]
select ARRAY[(select oid from pg_class order by relname)];
result is array of all the oid's in pg_class in relname order
Puh-leez tell me that's not in the spec. How is one supposed to
distinguish this usage from the scalar-subselect case?
Well, SQL99 has this:
::=
::=
ARRAY
but SQL200x has this:
::=
|
::=
ARRAY
::=
ARRAY
[ ]
select ARRAY[1,2] || 3
result '{1,2,3}'
Datatypes?
maybe?
select integer ARRAY[1,2] || 3
result '{1,2,3}'::integer[]
How many variants of the || operator do you plan to offer?
One for each builtin datatype[]/datatype pair (e.g. integer[]/integer),
and another for each datatype[] (e.g. integer[]/integer[])
What will be the side-effects on the parser's ability to pick one?
Not really sure. I figured I'd cross that bridge when I got to it. Are
there specific landmines you're thinking of in there?
>>select ARRAY[1,2] || ARRAY[3,4]
>> result '{1,2,3,4}'
select integer ARRAY[1,2] || integer ARRAY[3,4]
result '{1,2,3,4}'::integer[]
Or else the use UNION's algorithm for deriving the element type (you
suggested this previously, but I may have misunderstood)
Joe
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] Who puts the Windows binaries on the FTP server?
Merlin Moncure wrote: Justin Clift wrote: The timestamp of the file on the ftp server is 1/28/03. The timestamp of file I previously dl'd (which I collected from whatever link you posted on this list) is 2/3/03. However I downloaded the older version and they are the same (same number of bytes, at least). That's cool, it's probably just that the timestamp wasn't correctly carried onto the FTP server. :-) Regards and best wishes, Justin Clift Merlin -- "My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the first group; there was less competition there." - Indira Gandhi ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] SQL99 ARRAY support proposal
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> select ARRAY[1,2,3];
>result '{1,2,3}'
The array type is determined how? I'd like this syntax better if there
were a way to force the choice of array type...
> select ARRAY[(select oid from pg_class order by relname)];
>result is array of all the oid's in pg_class in relname order
Puh-leez tell me that's not in the spec. How is one supposed to
distinguish this usage from the scalar-subselect case?
> select ARRAY[1,2] || 3
>result '{1,2,3}'
Datatypes? How many variants of the || operator do you plan to offer?
What will be the side-effects on the parser's ability to pick one?
> select ARRAY[1,2] || ARRAY[3,4]
>result '{1,2,3,4}'
Same worry as above; likewise for the "proposed extensions".
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
[HACKERS] SQL99 ARRAY support proposal
I'd like to implement SQL99/200x ARRAY support (well, at least the
basics). Does anyone have objections to the following grammar/semantics?
===
Per SQL200x - examples
===
create table foo(f1 integer ARRAY[3]);
result same as create table foo(f1 integer[3]); the 3
really does nothing (this deviates from spec but is
same as current implementation)
create table foo(f1 integer ARRAY);
result same as create table foo(f1 integer[]);
select ARRAY[1,2,3];
result '{1,2,3}'
select ARRAY[(select oid from pg_class order by relname)];
result is array of all the oid's in pg_class in relname order
select ARRAY[1,2] || 3
result '{1,2,3}'
select ARRAY[1,2] || ARRAY[3,4]
result '{1,2,3,4}'
===
Proposed PostgreSQL extensions
===
select ARRAY[[1,2,3], [4,5,6]];
result '{{1,2,3},{4,5,6}}'
select ARRAY[[1,2],[3,4]] || 5
result '{{1},{3},{5}}'
select ARRAY[[1,2],[3,4]] || [5,6]
result '{{1,2},{3,4},{5,6}}'
use UNION's algorithm for deriving the element type when not specified
Comments, suggestions, objections?
Thanks,
Joe
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] regression failure in CVS HEAD
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I suppose we can just regard it as a build problem, then? Not sure what > the actual culprit was, though... I'm mystified too. But unless we see it again, I think we have to write it off as a build error. Do you use --enable-depend when configuring? I don't, so I know that I take some risk of build errors when I do things wrong. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [HACKERS] regression failure in CVS HEAD
On Sat, 2003-03-08 at 12:41, Tom Lane wrote: > Can you still reproduce the problem after a clean rebuild? No -- I ran "cvs update", "make clean", followed by 10 runs of the regression tests but I didn't get any similar failures. I suppose we can just regard it as a build problem, then? Not sure what the actual culprit was, though... Cheers, Neil -- Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] regression failure in CVS HEAD
Tom Lane wrote: I've spent the morning trying to reproduce this, without success. After a "make maintainer-clean", cvs update, full rebuild cycle, I cannot get anything funny to happen in "make check" under HPUX, RH Linux 8.0, or OS X. I'm a bit hesitant to write it off as a build problem, because (a) I can't see anything in the recent CVS logs that might cause such, and (b) it's surprising that it'd bite both you and me. But at this point I don't see what else to say. Can you still reproduce the problem after a clean rebuild? FWIW, I just updated to cvs tip, did make clean ./configure ... make all make install make check (repeated 6 times) The only failure I get is horology due to the "--enable-integer-datetimes" issue (which I think there is a patch in the queue for). This is on Red Hat 7.3. Joe ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] division by zero
Tom Lane wrote: > > I checked into this, and indeed OS X 10.2 is behaving funny: integer > divide by zero doesn't raise any signal, it just returns a bogus answer. > They're within their rights to do so according to the ANSI C spec > (wherein division by zero is stated to have undefined behavior). > But since other BSD-derived Unixen all seem to raise SIGFPE, I can't > help wondering if this shouldn't be considered a bug. FWIW, this also is a problem with some of the windows ports. For example, 'select 0/0' is unpredictable and can cause the server to gpf and restart. This does not include the SRA port, because I don't have it. Merlin ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] division by zero
"Eric B. Ridge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > select 1/0; fails as expected on my x86 Linux box, so yer right, it's > just my little Mac. "I switched because Mac's can divide by zero." I checked into this, and indeed OS X 10.2 is behaving funny: integer divide by zero doesn't raise any signal, it just returns a bogus answer. They're within their rights to do so according to the ANSI C spec (wherein division by zero is stated to have undefined behavior). But since other BSD-derived Unixen all seem to raise SIGFPE, I can't help wondering if this shouldn't be considered a bug. I think we have three possible responses: 1. Put explicit tests for zero into the integer division SQL function routines. 2. Consider this Apple's problem and file a bug report. 3. Both. I don't care for answer #1 alone, because it would only catch zero divides in the specific places we put in tests; internal errors would likely go uncaught. So I think a complaint to Apple is in order. I'm not sure whether to also put in zero-divide guards. Comments? regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [HACKERS] regression failure in CVS HEAD
I said: > Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> About 1 in every 5 runs of the (parallel) regression tests are failing >> for me with CVS HEAD: the triggers, inherit, vacuum, sanity_check, and >> misc tests fail. I can make the failures occur fairly consistently by >> running "make check" over and over again until the problem crops up. > Yipes. I have not been running the parallel tests (my habit is to run > make installcheck, instead) but there is clearly something busted. I've spent the morning trying to reproduce this, without success. After a "make maintainer-clean", cvs update, full rebuild cycle, I cannot get anything funny to happen in "make check" under HPUX, RH Linux 8.0, or OS X. I'm a bit hesitant to write it off as a build problem, because (a) I can't see anything in the recent CVS logs that might cause such, and (b) it's surprising that it'd bite both you and me. But at this point I don't see what else to say. Can you still reproduce the problem after a clean rebuild? regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
Re: [HACKERS] regression failure in CVS HEAD
> Yipes. I have not been running the parallel tests (my habit is to run > make installcheck, instead) but there is clearly something busted. > I got a bunch of failures similar to yours in my first attempt with > make check on HPUX --- see attached. > > > Any ideas on what the cause might be? > > No. Can anyone offer data on when this started? I see passes on March 2nd, updated and see passes today. Did 5 runs of make check on today source. -- Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP Key: http://www.rbt.ca/rbtpub.asc signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [HACKERS] Who puts the Windows binaries on the FTP server?
Justin Clift wrote: > > This is the 'proof of concept' cygwin windows build. Strangely, I have > > a newer build than the one on the ftp server. Is there a binary version > > of postgres with Jan's patch available? > > Uh Oh. > > When you say "newer version", what gives the feeling of it being newer? > The timestamp of the file on the ftp server is 1/28/03. The timestamp of file I previously dl'd (which I collected from whatever link you posted on this list) is 2/3/03. However I downloaded the older version and they are the same (same number of bytes, at least). Merlin ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] website charset
It's rumoured that Dennis Björklund once said: > There is no declaration of charset in the main webpage. Something like > > http-equiv="Content-Type"> > > would be nice. What is worse is that there are several charsets used. > In the International part I have to set mozilla to use utf-8 for it to > be rendered correctly and in the Event part I have to tell mozilla to > use iso-8859-1. There is not one setting that can show the whole page. > > There really should be only one charset on the page, and it should be > specified so that the browser can show it right and not have to guess. There was. Justin, did you say you tweaked the charset the other day? I don't have my email archives to hand... Regards, Dave. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] Who puts the Windows binaries on the FTP server?
It's rumoured that Justin Clift once said: > It's a simplified installation package of 7.3.1 with cygwin. Put it > together so we can get a feel for the packaging issues we'll need to > take into account for the proper release of a 7.4 Windows version. Yeah, but it won't will it? You're seeing all the normal Cygwin issues but nicely hidden away I'll bet. Installing the native version will be easy, as we won't be messing around with Cywin or CygIPC. I would expect to be able to build an installer in about 15 minutes excluding the time taken to make the installer's UI look purdy... Regards, Dave. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] request for sql3 compliance for the update command
Dave, Justin, I have several Informix clients who will be moving to a Postgresql/Aubit4gl solution at some point. The Informix line is, for them, a dead end. One way or another the backend will become Postgresql. Because of the number of SQL statements, I would encourage support where possible and reasonable. Jordan - Original Message - From: "Dave Cramer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Justin Clift" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Peter Eisentraut" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Pgsql Hackers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 10:18 PM Subject: Re: [HACKERS] request for sql3 compliance for the update command > Justin, > > This is certainly the case here. I think IBM is deprecating informix, > and many informix users are being forced to make a change, and they are > seriously considering postgres as an alternative. > > It behooves us to look at aubit http://aubit4gl.sourceforge.net/ before > making this decision as well. > > > I believe the aubit project has the potential to move postgres forward > considerably as well. > > Dave > > On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 21:08, Justin Clift wrote: > > Tom Lane wrote: > > > Dave Cramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > >>Ok, if a patch were submitted to the parser to allow the syntax in > > >>question would it be considered? > > > > > > > > > I would vote against it ... but that's only one vote. > > > > As a thought, will it add significant maintenance penalties or be > > detrimental? > > > > There seem to be quite a lot of Informix people moving to PostgreSQL > > these days, moreso than Oracle shops. Might have been brought on by > > IBM's purchase of Informix. > > > > Wondering if this one change be a significant improvement in regards to > > making it easier to migrate, or just a minor thing? > > > > Regards and best wishes, > > > > Justin Clift > > > > > > > regards, tom lane > -- > Dave Cramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cramer Consulting > > > ---(end of broadcast)--- > TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
