From: | Nicolas Huillard <nhuillard(at)ghs(dot)fr> |
---|---|
To: | "pgsql-general(at)hub(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)hub(dot)org>, "pgsql-sql(at)hub(dot)org" <pgsql-sql(at)hub(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: [SQL] RE: [GENERAL] Problem with SELECT on large negative INT4 |
Date: | 2000-01-28 22:31:34 |
Message-ID: | 01BF69E7.D17FF8D0@agen.int.ghs |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-sql |
A little adjustment : SOME queries work with the new binary and the old indexes. Many other don't, as Tom and Hiroshi figured.
With a new binary and after reloding the DB, every seems to work correctly.
Nicolas Huillard
-----Message d'origine-----
De: Nicolas Huillard [SMTP:nhuillard(at)ghs(dot)fr]
Date: vendredi 28 janvier 2000 22:42
À: pgsql-general(at)hub(dot)org; pgsql-sql(at)hub(dot)org
Objet: RE: [SQL] RE: [GENERAL] Problem with SELECT on large negative INT4
Thank to everybody, I recompiled Postgres and tested it on the same DB : the offending SELECT worked, without any index regeneration. Maybe the order in which the items where inserted in the table (using COPY, before creating the index) made it working.
...
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Graeme Merrall | 2000-01-29 00:09:38 | Quick function question |
Previous Message | Nicolas Huillard | 2000-01-28 21:41:43 | RE: [SQL] RE: [GENERAL] Problem with SELECT on large negative INT4 |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Roland Roberts | 2000-01-29 04:22:54 | Help with pl/pgsql, triggers, and foreign keys |
Previous Message | Nicolas Huillard | 2000-01-28 21:41:43 | RE: [SQL] RE: [GENERAL] Problem with SELECT on large negative INT4 |