2010/6/1 Bruce Momjian :
> Tom Lane wrote:
(...)
>> The index-based-max code is throwing in the IS NOT NULL condition
>> without thought for where it has to go in the index condition order.
>> Will look into fixing this tomorrow.
>
> FYI, this no longer throws an error in current CVS so was fixed b
Tom Lane wrote:
> Ian Barwick writes:
> > Apologies, slight c&p error; correct version of query:
>
> > SELECT ov.object_id
> >FROM object_version ov
> > WHERE ov.object_id = 1
> > AND ov.version =0
> > AND ov.object_status_id = (
> > SELECT MAX(ov1.object_status_id)
> > FR
Ian Barwick writes:
> Apologies, slight c&p error; correct version of query:
> SELECT ov.object_id
>FROM object_version ov
> WHERE ov.object_id = 1
> AND ov.version =0
> AND ov.object_status_id = (
> SELECT MAX(ov1.object_status_id)
> FROM object_version ov1
> WHERE o
2010/5/10 Ian Barwick :
> SELECT ov.object_id
> FROM object_version ov
> WHERE ov.object_id = 1
> AND ov.version ='0
> AND ov.object_status_id = (
> SELECT MAX(ov1.object_status_id)
> FROM object_version ov1
> WHERE ov1.object_id=ov.object_id
> AND ov1.version = o
Hi
2010/5/10 Tom Lane :
> Ian Barwick writes:
>> 2010/5/9 David Fetter :
>>> A self-contained way to reproduce this, ideally small, would be
>>> fantastic :)
>
> s/fantastic/absolutely required to do anything with this report/
Yes, I appreciate that :) I am a bit pressed for time and as googling
Ian Barwick writes:
> 2010/5/9 David Fetter :
>> A self-contained way to reproduce this, ideally small, would be
>> fantastic :)
s/fantastic/absolutely required to do anything with this report/
> I will see if I can knock together a reproducible test case, might
> take a day or so. At the moment
2010/5/9 David Fetter :
> On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 05:48:27PM +0900, Ian Barwick wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> I've just compiled the 9.0 beta1 source tarball and am testing my
>> custom application against it (which has been running on PostgreSQL
>> since 7.3 or so).
>>
>> The below statement results in the f
On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 05:48:27PM +0900, Ian Barwick wrote:
> Hi
>
> I've just compiled the 9.0 beta1 source tarball and am testing my
> custom application against it (which has been running on PostgreSQL
> since 7.3 or so).
>
> The below statement results in the following error message:
>
>
Hi
I've just compiled the 9.0 beta1 source tarball and am testing my
custom application against it (which has been running on PostgreSQL
since 7.3 or so).
The below statement results in the following error message:
"ERROR: btree index keys must be ordered by attribute"
evidently in relation
