Re: Connection string - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Harpreet Dhaliwal
Subject Re: Connection string
Date
Msg-id d86a77ef0608150948g6d0e8caajae470344b3dea61@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Connection string  (Michael Fuhr <mike@fuhr.org>)
List pgsql-general
Its done

service iptables stop did the trick
firewall was running on my DB server
forgot to stop it

Thanks
~Harpreet

On 8/15/06, Michael Fuhr <mike@fuhr.org> wrote:
On Sun, Aug 13, 2006 at 10:30:24AM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 04:40:36PM -0600, Michael Fuhr wrote:
> > Will you take care of it or should I submit a patch?  I've noticed
>
> I you have the time to write the patch I woul dappreciate it.

I'll submit a patch.  However, in the case of string literals not
working, is that a documentation bug or a code bug?  Are they
supposed to work?

> > a few other discrepancies between the documentation and actual
> > behavior, like examples with "VARCHAR val;" that the preprocessor
> > rejects with "ERROR: pointer to varchar are not implemented."
>
> Do you have an example? This surely looks like a bug.

See several code examples in the last half of the "Using Host
Variables" documentation:

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/interactive/ecpg-variables.html

Here's a complete example with code pasted from the documentation:

% cat foo.pgc
int main(void)
{
    EXEC SQL BEGIN DECLARE SECTION;
    int v1;
    VARCHAR v2;
    EXEC SQL END DECLARE SECTION;

    return 0;
}

% ecpg foo.pgc
foo.pgc:5: ERROR: pointer to varchar are not implemented

Is that a documentation bug or a code bug?

--
Michael Fuhr

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Max
Date:
Subject: Re:
Next
From: Gregory Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: Partial indexes Vs standard indexes : Insert performance