109 Commits (4cf595bf88a7fa42f95a1346e06e09dfde672591)

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Bruce Momjian	4cf9d03ec7	Added prototypes missing from parser patch. ... Added needed include file.	29 years ago
Bruce Momjian	f59a46a8c8	Parser Overhaul	29 years ago
Bruce Momjian	83cb729887	More closing of relations left open by parser.	29 years ago
Bruce Momjian	abb1b3e770	I checked the alter table code, and started suspecting the relation ... 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.	29 years ago
Marc G. Fournier	6c684b1847	Fixes: ... 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>	30 years ago
Marc G. Fournier	ab22b34891	Fixes: ... 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>	30 years ago
Marc G. Fournier	94215d51c8	Fixes: ... 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>	30 years ago
Marc G. Fournier	20288400f3	Fixes: ... 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>	30 years ago
Marc G. Fournier	d31084e9d1	Postgres95 1.01 Distribution - Virgin Sources	30 years ago