Re: [BUGS] collation problem on 9.1-beta1

2011-06-09 Thread Bruce Momjian
Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On tor, 2011-06-09 at 13:30 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > >> Column numbers in ORDER BY is ANSI syntax so I don't think calling > >> them "legacy" is accurate. ?"limited functionality"? > > > > It was in SQL 92, but r

[BUGS] Fwd: Difference in postgres9.0.4 and postgres9.1beta1 when displaying error lines in functions with comments

2011-06-09 Thread Abel Abraham Camarillo Ojeda
I should have posted this here before sending it to pgsql-hackers... ups. -- Forwarded message -- From: Abel Abraham Camarillo Ojeda Date: Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 8:58 PM Subject: Difference in postgres9.0.4 and postgres9.1beta1 when displaying error lines in functions with comments T

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6050: Dump and restore of view after a schema change: can't restore the view

2011-06-09 Thread Bruce Momjian
Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Robert Haas writes: > >> If your point here is that you don't want to spend time hacking on > >> this because it's a fairly marginal feature and therefore not terribly > >> high on your priority list, I can understand that.

Re: [BUGS] collation problem on 9.1-beta1

2011-06-09 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On tor, 2011-06-09 at 13:30 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> Column numbers in ORDER BY is ANSI syntax so I don't think calling >> them "legacy" is accurate.  "limited functionality"? > > It was in SQL 92, but removed in 99, so it's technical

Re: [BUGS] collation problem on 9.1-beta1

2011-06-09 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On tor, 2011-06-09 at 13:30 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Column numbers in ORDER BY is ANSI syntax so I don't think calling > them "legacy" is accurate. "limited functionality"? It was in SQL 92, but removed in 99, so it's technically no longer part of the standard. -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mai

Re: [BUGS] collation problem on 9.1-beta1

2011-06-09 Thread Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On ons, 2011-05-11 at 14:58 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Marc Cousin writes: > > > I've been starting to work on a 'what's new in 9.1' like i did last > > > year, and am faced with what I feel is a bug, while building a demo case > > > for collation. > > > > > Here it is:

Re: [BUGS] BUG #5926: information schema dtd_identifier for element_types, columns, parameters views inconsistent

2011-06-09 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On ons, 2011-06-08 at 11:09 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > As far as I can tell from the spec, dtd_identifier > ought to be the identifier of the element type, while > collection_type_identifier should be a made-up identifier for the > array type. That would make the sample query given in the docs > cor