Re: [SQL] BULK COLLECT
Scott and others, The following article by Steven Feuerstein from 2004 explains it quite clear, I think. http://www.oracle.com/technology/oramag/oracle/04-jan/o14tech_plsql.html Paul Dam -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Scott Marlowe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Verzonden: vrijdag 21 november 2008 17:46 Aan: Paul Dam CC: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Onderwerp: Re: [SQL] BULK COLLECT 2008/11/21 Paul Dam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hoi, > > > > Is there an equivalent in PL/pgSQL for BULK COLLECT in PL/SQL of Oracle? I'm not that familiar with BULK COLLECT in oracle. What does it do? -- Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql
Re: [SQL] Permission denied for create table
Pascal Tufenkji wrote: > > P.S. I'm working on PostgreSQL 7.3.2 In case you missed Marcin's comment - don't use this version. Upgrade. Version 7.3 is no longer supported by the core developers. Even if you were determined to run 7.3 you should have upgraded to 7.3.21 at some point. Read through the release notes and check what bugs have been fixed since 7.3.2: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/release.html So - don't use 7.3.2 AT ALL - upgrade to a more recent release. The latest version is 8.3.5, and that would be a good choice. If that's not possible, then 7.3.21 at least. -- Richard Huxton Archonet Ltd -- Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql
Re: [SQL] Permission denied for create table
"Pascal Tufenkji" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Creating a normal table works fine, but creating a table with subqueries is > giving me "permission denied" You need to explicitly grant select permission on the child tables not just the parent. > P.S. I'm working on PostgreSQL 7.3.2 As already noted, you really ought to update that ... among other things, the documentation in recent versions explicitly covers the point above ;-) regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql
[SQL] Sequence and nextval problem
Hello everybody.
I've got an vb aplication that uses an Access database. I'm trying
to convert the database to postgres. The conversion was done ok, but
i've got a little problem that i don't know how to solve. Let's see if
anyone can help me.
The conversion from access database to postgres worked fine.
Everithing it's ok. But now, when i use my database i've found a problem
with sequences. In the conversion, the "autonumeric" fields from access
have been converted to sequences, everithing ok in a first view. The
problem comes because the autonumeric fields in access always return the
last value of the table +1, but postgres no. Postgres returns "lost" (i
don't know how to call them) values. An example.
This is an example of a table:
code | description
- |
1 | desc 1
2 | desc 2
6 | desc 6
7 | desc 7
In access if i execute "INSERT INTO table (description) VALUES
('desc 8'), the result row is 8 | desc 8
But in postgres the same query te result row is 3 | desc 8
My question is, can i do something to make ANY sequence to take the
last value from his associated table, and not a "lost" value?
Thank you very much
--
Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql
Re: [SQL] Sequence and nextval problem
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Tk421 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello everybody.
>
> I've got an vb aplication that uses an Access database. I'm trying to
> convert the database to postgres. The conversion was done ok, but i've got a
> little problem that i don't know how to solve. Let's see if anyone can help
> me.
>
> The conversion from access database to postgres worked fine. Everithing
> it's ok. But now, when i use my database i've found a problem with
> sequences. In the conversion, the "autonumeric" fields from access have been
> converted to sequences, everithing ok in a first view. The problem comes
> because the autonumeric fields in access always return the last value of the
> table +1, but postgres no. Postgres returns "lost" (i don't know how to call
> them) values. An example.
>
> This is an example of a table:
>
> code | description
> - |
> 1 | desc 1
> 2 | desc 2
> 6 | desc 6
> 7 | desc 7
>
>
> In access if i execute "INSERT INTO table (description) VALUES ('desc 8'),
> the result row is 8 | desc 8
> But in postgres the same query te result row is 3 | desc 8
>
> My question is, can i do something to make ANY sequence to take the last
> value from his associated table, and not a "lost" value?
The sequence should be set to the next value available after loading
data and then left alone. You can set the value with
setval('seqname'); It looks to me like if you did a few more inserts,
you'd hit the value of 6 for your id field and your insert would fail
until the sequence got past 7 then it would start working.
Note that in postgresql, the value given by nextval is the next value
of the sequence, not max(val)+1 as max(val)+1 doesn't scale / isn't
really transaction safe.
--
Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql
Re: [SQL] Sequence and nextval problem
On Nov 24, 2008, at 2:12 PM, Tk421 wrote:
Hello everybody.
I've got an vb aplication that uses an Access database. I'm trying
to convert the database to postgres. The conversion was done ok, but
i've got a little problem that i don't know how to solve. Let's see
if anyone can help me.
The conversion from access database to postgres worked fine.
Everithing it's ok. But now, when i use my database i've found a
problem with sequences. In the conversion, the "autonumeric" fields
from access have been converted to sequences, everithing ok in a
first view. The problem comes because the autonumeric fields in
access always return the last value of the table +1, but postgres
no. Postgres returns "lost" (i don't know how to call them) values.
An example.
This is an example of a table:
code | description
- |
1 | desc 1
2 | desc 2
6 | desc 6
7 | desc 7
In access if i execute "INSERT INTO table (description) VALUES
('desc 8'), the result row is 8 | desc 8
But in postgres the same query te result row is 3 | desc 8
My question is, can i do something to make ANY sequence to take
the last value from his associated table, and not a "lost" value?
Thank you very much
This sounds like if the start of the sequence is set incorrectly:
Try this : SELECT setval('NAME OF SEQUENCE', SOME_INTEGER, true);
btw, you should also not expect a specific value from the sequence
except that you will always get the next value from the sequence.
it's also generally a bad idea to do select max(someid)+1 from table.
The whole concept of a sequence is thus much better.
Ries
--
Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql
Re: [SQL] Sequence and nextval problem
Tk421 wrote:
Hello everybody.
I've got an vb aplication that uses an Access database. I'm trying to
convert the database to postgres. The conversion was done ok, but i've
got a little problem that i don't know how to solve. Let's see if anyone
can help me.
The conversion from access database to postgres worked fine.
Everithing it's ok. But now, when i use my database i've found a problem
with sequences. In the conversion, the "autonumeric" fields from access
have been converted to sequences, everithing ok in a first view. The
problem comes because the autonumeric fields in access always return the
last value of the table +1, but postgres no. Postgres returns "lost" (i
don't know how to call them) values.
Access doesn't understand server-side generated keys very well.
You need to use a Before Insert event on the form to issue a passthrough
query using Visual Basic that invokes nextval('seqname') to get the next
ID from the sequence, then fills the primary key field with the return
value. That way, when Access submits the INSERT statement it'll include
the primary key generated by Pg, so you land up with the same effect as
if you left it DEFAULT, except that Access knows what the new ID will be
and doesn't get confused when it can't find the record after inserting it.
Access 2007 has a special quirk, where it'll execute any passthrough
query (including stored procedures) invoked via Visual Basic twice if it
returns a resultset. Consequently, you must EITHER retrieve a return
value from a query OR invoke one with side effects, not both.
If you call nextval(...) and read the return value, you'll actually have
two IDs generated from the sequence, the first of which is discarded.
You probably don't care about this, but it's probably best to avoid the
problem anyway. What you need to do is fire the
SELECT nextval('seqname')
query with ReturnsRecords=False . You then invoke:
SELECT currval('seqname')
to read the generated ID. currval(...) will be called twice, but you
don't care as it has no side-effects.
I've attached some Visual Basic code that demonstrates this. It's easily
adapted to other stored procedures. In fact, I've included a sample of
another stored procedure invocation in another routine; just delete it.
form_module.txt contains an example use of the code on a form. It should
be included in the module for the form(s) you want to handle, and
adapted to use the right field name for the primary key. The other file,
passthrough.txt contains a VB module named "passthrough" that contains
the actual passthrough query handling code used by the before insert
routine in the form module.
Note that you're in for some other exciting issues if you use access
with Pg. You will need to load a set of casts and operators to ensure
that Access's odd handling of Boolean values works; you'll need to set
some specific ODBC driver options; you may want to set the
transform_null_equals option in Pg to let Access use it's horrible
"value = NULL" tests, etc. See:
http://www.postgresonline.com/journal/index.php?/archives/24-Using-MS-Access-with-PostgreSQL.html
for sample operator/cast definitions. There are some notes in the top of
the "passthrough.txt" module I attached that explain the ODBC driver
options you'll want.
--
Craig Ringer
Private Sub Form_BeforeInsert(Cancel As Integer)
'Assign a primary key, since Access isn't smart enough to retrieve the
'database-generated one (or ODBC provides no generic mechanism for doing
so).
If Not IsNull(Me.booking_id) Then
Error (1)
End If
Me.booking_id = nextval("booking_booking_id_seq")
End SubOption Compare Database
'The following options must be set in the ODBC driver:
'
'Row Versioning (tells the driver to use only the primary key in record
searches)
'True as -1
'(unchecked) bools as char
'
'Additionally, the database must have a set of operators loaded
'to permit certain type comparisons required by MS Access, like
'integer to boolean compares.
'
'Note that Access cannot correctly determine the value of a
'generated primary key. It is necessary to explicitly get the
'next value of the target sequence with a passthrough query
'to get nextval() on the sequence.
'
'-
' WARNING WARNING WARNING
'-
' Access 2007 appears to have an quirk bug in passthrough query support.
' If the ReturnsRecords property is set, a query appears to be fired twice.
' This is ugly if we're invoking a stored procedure that's intended to have
' side effects and return a value. Consider `nextval(seqname)' for example.
' To work around this, no stored procedure with side effects may be called
' with ReturnsRecords = true ; instead, it must make its result available
' via the side effects.
'
Public Function DSN() As String
DSN = "ODBC;DRIVER={PostgreSQL
Unicode};DATABASE=dbname;SERVER=server.name.example.com;PORT=5432;CA=r;A6=;A7=100;A8=4096;
Re: [SQL] Sequence and nextval problem
Earlier, Craig Ringer wrote: for sample operator/cast definitions. There are some notes in the top of the "passthrough.txt" module I attached that explain the ODBC driver options you'll want. Also, note that in the message I just posted the function DSN() must be adapted to include the approprate DSN for your database. You can most easily obtain this by opening an ODBC linked table in design mode (ignore the warning about changes not being saved), opening the properties palette, and fishing the linked table DSN out from there. Thinking about it, I should adjust my code to pull the DSN out of a linked table at runtime. When I initially put it together I didn't realise it was stored as a linked table property, so I hand-wrote a suitable DSN. If you try to use the module I attached without changing the DSN to match your database it just won't work. -- Craig Ringer -- Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql
