Changes:
* Unique index capability works using the syntax 'create unique
index'.
* Duplicate OID's in the system tables are removed. I put
little scripts called 'duplicate_oids' and 'find_oid' in
include/catalog that help to find and remove duplicate OID's.
I also moved 'unused_oids' from backend/catalog to
include/catalog, since it has to be in the same directory
as the include files in order to work.
* The backend tries converting the name of a function or aggregate
to all lowercase if the original name given doesn't work (mostly
for compatibility with ODBC).
* You can 'SELECT NULL' to your heart's content.
* I put my _bt_updateitem fix in instead, which uses
_bt_insertonpg so that even if the new key is so big that
the page has to be split, everything still works.
* All literal references to system catalog OID's have been
replaced with references to define'd constants from the catalog
header files.
* I added a couple of node copy functions. I think this was a
preliminary attempt to get rules to work.
It adds a WITH OIDS option to the copy command, which allows
dumping and loading of oids.
If a copy command tried to load in an oid that is greater than
its current system max oid, the system max oid is incremented. No
checking is done to see if other backends are running and have cached
oids.
pg_dump as its first step when using the -o (oid) option, will
copy in a dummy row to set the system max oid value so as rows are
loaded in, they are certain to be lower than the system oid.
pg_dump now creates indexes at the end to speed loading
Submitted by: Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>
Here's a couple more small fixes that I've made to make my runtime
checker happy with the code. More along the lines of those that
I sent in the past, ie, a pointer to an array != the name of
an array. The last patch is that I mailed about yesterday -- I got
two replies of "do it", so it's done. As far as I can tell, however,
the function in question is never called by pg95, so either way
it can't hurt...
From: "Kurt J. Lidl" <lidl@va.pubnix.com>
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>
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>
In postgres95/src/backend/nodes/readfuncs, lines 1188 and 1189,
local_node->relname is taken to point to a NameType, while its
defined as a pointer to char. Both the casting to Name and the
call of namestrcpy should, IMHO, be changed appropriately (first
patch).
As far as I could see from the Linux signal header file,
a signal handler is declared as
typedef void (*__sighandler_t)(int);
Few changes to postgres95/src/backend/storage/lmgr/proc.c seem
appropriate to comply with this.
Finally, postgres95/src/bin/pg_version/pg_version.c defines
a function GetDataHome (by default, returning an integer)
and returns NULL in the function, which isn't an integer...
Submitted by: ernst.molitor@uni-bonn.de
