1. 08 11月, 1996 1 次提交
  2. 06 11月, 1996 1 次提交
  3. 04 11月, 1996 2 次提交
  4. 31 10月, 1996 1 次提交
  5. 30 10月, 1996 1 次提交
  6. 14 10月, 1996 1 次提交
  7. 13 10月, 1996 1 次提交
    • B
      I checked the alter table code, and started suspecting the relation · abb1b3e7
      Bruce Momjian 提交于
      cache.  I found if I manually added a line to flush the whole relation
      cache, the assert error disappeared.  Looking through the code, I found
      that the relation cache is flushed at the end of each query if the
      reference count is zero for the relation.  However, printf's showed that
      the rd_relcnt(reference count) for the accessed query was not returning
      to zero after each query.
      
      It turns out the parser was doing a heap_ropen in parser/analyze.c to
      get information about the table's columns, but was not doing a
      heap_close.
      
      This was causing the query after the ALTER TABLE ADD to see the old
      table structure, and the executor's assert was reporting the problem.
      abb1b3e7
  8. 07 8月, 1996 2 次提交
    • M
      Fixes: · 6c684b18
      Marc G. Fournier 提交于
      Previously Postgres95 wouldn't accept 'order by' clauses with fields
      referred to as '<table>.<field>', e.g.:
      
              select t1.field1, t2.field2 from table1 t1, table2 t2
                      order by t2.field2;
      
      This syntax is required by the ODBC SQL spec.
      
      Submitted by: Dan McGuirk <mcguirk@indirect.com>
      6c684b18
    • M
      Fixes: · ab22b348
      Marc G. Fournier 提交于
      While a normal SELECT statement can contain a GROUP BY clause, a cursor
      declaration cannot. This was not the case in PG-1.0. Was there a good
      reason why this was changed? Are cursors being phased out? Is there any way
      to get data with just a SELECT (and without a DECLARE CURSOR ...)?
      
      The patch below seems to fix things. If anyone can see a problem with it,
      please let me know. Thanks.
      
      Submitted by:  David Smith <dasmith@perseus.tufts.edu>
      ab22b348
  9. 20 7月, 1996 1 次提交
    • M
      Fixes: · 94215d51
      Marc G. Fournier 提交于
      The updating of array fields is broken in Postgres95-1.01, An array can
      be only replaced with a new array but not have some elements modified.
      This is caused by two bugs in the parser and in the array utilities.
      Furthermore it is not possible to update array with a base type of
      variable length.
      
      
      - submitted by: Massimo Dal Zotto <dz@cs.unitn.it>
      94215d51
  10. 19 7月, 1996 1 次提交
    • M
      Fixes: · 20288400
      Marc G. Fournier 提交于
      I have written some patches which add support for NULLs to Postgres95.
      In fact support for NULLs was already present in postgres, but it had been
      disabled because not completely debugged, I believe. My patches simply add
      some checks here and there. To enable the new code you must add -DNULL_PATCH
      to CFLAGS in Makefile.global. After recompiling you can do things like:
      
      insert into a (x, y) values (1, NULL);
      update a set x = NULL where x = 0;
      
      You can't still use a "where x=NULL" clause, you must use ISNULL instead.
      This could probably be an easy fix to do.
      
      
      
      
      Submitted by: Massimo Dal Zotto <dz@cs.unitn.it>
      20288400
  11. 09 7月, 1996 1 次提交