| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | John Brothers <johnbr(at)mindspring(dot)com>, pgsql-general(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 05:59:55 |
| Message-ID: | 9736.949039195@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> Hiroshi neglected to mention that you'd probably need to drop and
>> recreate the index after applying the patch; if it's indeed out of
>> order, just patching the comparator bug isn't enough to fix it.
> Does Hiroshi's patch get applied?
Now that I understand the problem, yes, his patch is good as far as
it goes. There are probably other places with the same problem...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2000-01-28 07:05:18 | RE: [SQL] RE: [GENERAL] Problem with SELECT on large negative INT4 |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-01-28 05:31:26 | Re: [SQL] RE: [GENERAL] Problem with SELECT on large negative INT4 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-01-28 06:16:40 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: ORDBMS |
| Previous Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2000-01-28 05:48:18 | RE: [HACKERS] [6.5.2] potentially major bug? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2000-01-28 07:05:18 | RE: [SQL] RE: [GENERAL] Problem with SELECT on large negative INT4 |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-01-28 05:31:26 | Re: [SQL] RE: [GENERAL] Problem with SELECT on large negative INT4 |