Thread: pgaccess and libtcl
Hello, I'm under linux redhat 7.2 with postgresql 7.0. I'm a french user so I use spécial character like é or è. Apparently pgaccess can't display the right french character with this distribution (rh 7.2). I have contacted the man who write pgaccess and he thinks that it is not a bug of pgaccess. Me too I think it's a tcl/tk version problem. I have this package installed: tcl-8.3.1 and tk-8.3.1 Have you noticed such problems ? Regards. -- .------------------------------------------------. .^. | Didier Bretin, France | dbr@informactis.com | /V\ |-----------------------| www.informactis.com | // \\ | `------------------------|/( )\ | Visit: http://www.vim.org/ | ^^-^^ `------------------------------------------------'
Hi, We use pgaccess with Greek characters - no problem... Check your tcl encodings.... "encoding system" gives current system encoding "encoding names" gives available encodings.. "encoding sytem some_encoding" changes the system encoding nicolas boretos Didier Bretin wrote: > Hello, > > I'm under linux redhat 7.2 with postgresql 7.0. > I'm a french user so I use spécial character like é or è. > > Apparently pgaccess can't display the right french character > with this distribution (rh 7.2). I have contacted the man who > write pgaccess and he thinks that it is not a bug of pgaccess. > > Me too I think it's a tcl/tk version problem. > > I have this package installed: > tcl-8.3.1 and tk-8.3.1 > > Have you noticed such problems ? > > Regards. >
Hello Nicolas, On Fri, 05 Apr 2002 10:49:09 +0300 Nicolas Boretos <nicolasb@maich.gr> wrote: > Hi, > We use pgaccess with Greek characters - no problem... > Check your tcl encodings.... > "encoding system" gives current system encoding > "encoding names" gives available encodings.. > "encoding sytem some_encoding" changes the system encoding Thanks for these commands: I'm not a TCl guru :o). Apparently I have the right encoding for french characters: iso8859-1. So the problem is probably not here ... I continue to search ... -- .------------------------------------------------. .^. | Didier Bretin, France | dbr@informactis.com | /V\ |-----------------------| www.informactis.com | // \\ | `------------------------|/( )\ | Visit: http://www.vim.org/ | ^^-^^ `------------------------------------------------'
Didier Bretin <dbr@informactis.com> writes:
> I'm under linux redhat 7.2 with postgresql 7.0.
> I'm a french user so I use sp�cial character like � or �.
> Apparently pgaccess can't display the right french character
> with this distribution (rh 7.2).
I'm not completely certain, but I think that there have been some
fixes in that area since PG 7.0. I recommend an update to 7.2.1.
regards, tom lane
BUG: PGACCESS does not warn when trying to update a record that was deleted by someone else.
From
Jean-Luc Lachance
Date:
DARN!!! I have just wasted half a day updating record with PcAccess. If one is updating a record that was deleted by someone else, PgAccess does not warn that the record no longer exists and silently accept the update. Then, if the list is refreshed, the record is gone!!!
Re: BUG: PGACCESS does not warn when trying to update a record that was deleted by someone else.
From
terry
Date:
Actually, M$ Access does the same thing. When a form (or query) is populated with the contents of a record, it no longer is changed within the database - only within the form (or query). It is only when the record is saved that there is any indication of change or deletion. The only way to determine if the record in the form (or query) has been changed or deleted is to check that record in the database during the operation, which is not routinely done. >> DARN!!! >> >> I have just wasted half a day updating record with PcAccess. >> >> If one is updating a record that was deleted by someone else, >> PgAccess does not warn that the record no longer exists and >> silently accept the update. >> >> Then, if the list is refreshed, the record is gone!!! >> >> ---------------------------(end of >> broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked >> our extensive FAQ? >> >> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html -- terry
But, When a record is updated with PgAccess, the least that it should do is check the return status of the update to find that the record no longer exists and warn the user!!! JLL terry wrote: > > Actually, M$ Access does the same thing. When a form (or query) > is populated with the contents of a record, it no longer is > changed within the database - only within the form (or query). > It is only when the record is saved that there is any indication > of change or deletion. The only way to determine if the record > in the form (or query) has been changed or deleted is to check > that record in the database during the operation, which is not > routinely done. > > >> DARN!!! > >> > >> I have just wasted half a day updating record with PcAccess. > >> > >> If one is updating a record that was deleted by someone else, > >> PgAccess does not warn that the record no longer exists and > >> silently accept the update. > >> > >> Then, if the list is refreshed, the record is gone!!! > >> > >> ---------------------------(end of > >> broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked > >> our extensive FAQ? > >> > >> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html > > -- > > terry
Well in my applications, we routinly check the availabiliy of the record priod to an update operation as a matter of course. We come from the old days of CISAM...<GRIN> --Hal. On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Jean-Luc Lachance wrote: > But, > > When a record is updated with PgAccess, the least that it should do is > check the return status of the update to find that the record no longer > exists and warn the user!!! > > JLL > > terry wrote: > > > > Actually, M$ Access does the same thing. When a form (or query) > > is populated with the contents of a record, it no longer is > > changed within the database - only within the form (or query). > > It is only when the record is saved that there is any indication > > of change or deletion. The only way to determine if the record > > in the form (or query) has been changed or deleted is to check > > that record in the database during the operation, which is not > > routinely done. > > > > >> DARN!!! > > >> > > >> I have just wasted half a day updating record with PcAccess. > > >> > > >> If one is updating a record that was deleted by someone else, > > >> PgAccess does not warn that the record no longer exists and > > >> silently accept the update. > > >> > > >> Then, if the list is refreshed, the record is gone!!! > > >> > > >> ---------------------------(end of > > >> broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked > > >> our extensive FAQ? > > >> > > >> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html > > > > -- > > > > terry > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly >
You are correct. Looking at the code a bit, it looks like it does the Right Thing when inserting a new record, but does not do the same for updating a record. Can you file a bug so that this can get tracked properly? http://bugzilla.pgaccess.org thanks, --brett On Thu, 2002-08-15 at 09:12, Jean-Luc Lachance wrote: > But, > > When a record is updated with PgAccess, the least that it should do is > check the return status of the update to find that the record no longer > exists and warn the user!!! > > JLL > > terry wrote: > > > > Actually, M$ Access does the same thing. When a form (or query) > > is populated with the contents of a record, it no longer is > > changed within the database - only within the form (or query). > > It is only when the record is saved that there is any indication > > of change or deletion. The only way to determine if the record > > in the form (or query) has been changed or deleted is to check > > that record in the database during the operation, which is not > > routinely done. > > > > >> DARN!!! > > >> > > >> I have just wasted half a day updating record with PcAccess. > > >> > > >> If one is updating a record that was deleted by someone else, > > >> PgAccess does not warn that the record no longer exists and > > >> silently accept the update. > > >> > > >> Then, if the list is refreshed, the record is gone!!! > > >> > > >> ---------------------------(end of > > >> broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked > > >> our extensive FAQ? > > >> > > >> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html > > > > -- > > > > terry > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly -- Brett Schwarz brett_schwarz AT yahoo.com