Thread: Issues w/ 7.1 to 7.2 upgrade.
Hi all. I just upgraded from 7.1 to 7.2, mainly because of the facts that vacuum doesn't do table locks and I thought that "replace into" would be in 7.2. Anyway, I don't see that "replace into" is there... Also, I noticed a slight difference that caught me off guard: If I try to insert '1234567890' into a varchar(5) under 7.1, the value of the field will be '12345'. If I try it under 7.2, I get an error. Needless to say, I learned a bit more about my dataset this morning... <grin> Mike Diehl, Network Monitoring Tool Devl. Sandia National Laboratories. (505) 284-3137 jdiehl@sandia.gov
Mike, > I just upgraded from 7.1 to 7.2, mainly because of the facts that > vacuum > doesn't do table locks and I thought that "replace into" would be in > 7.2. > > Anyway, I don't see that "replace into" is there... Nope. I hadn't had the impression from the list traffic that thedevelopers ever considered letting in this bit of non-standardSQL. While it's undoubtedly useful, it's not in the SQL 92 spec and a*lot* of extra programming would be requiredto support it (forexample, those of us who use UPDATE and INSERT triggers might findourselves re-writing them all). Remember: If you really, really want "replace into", Postgres *is* anopen-source database. You are always welcome to hackyour own"replace into" patch. > Also, I noticed a slight difference that caught me off guard: > > If I try to insert '1234567890' into a varchar(5) under 7.1, the > value of > the field will be '12345'. > > If I try it under 7.2, I get an error. Another annoying change per the spec, I believe. Personally, thischange made me happy because unexpected truncations hadpreviouslyescaped my notice. But it did lead to a spate of emergency bug fixesin my code. -Josh ______AGLIO DATABASE SOLUTIONS___________________________ Josh Berkus Complete informationtechnology josh@agliodbs.com and data management solutions (415) 565-7293 for law firms, small businesses fax 621-2533 and non-profit organizations. San Francisco
On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, Diehl, Jeffrey wrote: > Hi all. > > I just upgraded from 7.1 to 7.2, mainly because of the facts that vacuum > doesn't do table locks and I thought that "replace into" would be in 7.2. > > Anyway, I don't see that "replace into" is there... Hi Mike, I'm anxiously awaiting DROP COLUMN (rather than using the workaround of SELECTing desired attributes into a new relation, dropping the old rel and renaming the new...) I was hoping it would be in 7.2 but not yet. :-( > Also, I noticed a slight difference that caught me off guard: > > If I try to insert '1234567890' into a varchar(5) under 7.1, the value of > the field will be '12345'. > > If I try it under 7.2, I get an error. I found this in using 7.2 beta - it mimics Oracle's response to a string that exceeds the len of the attribute. I kinda liked the unstated substr() behaviour. But I guess it was a bit sloppy. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thomas Good tomg@admin.nrnet.org Programmer/Analyst thomas@sqlclinic.net Residential Services, Behavioral Health Services Saint Vincent Catholic Medical Centers -- SQL Clinic - An Open Source Clinical Record www.sqlclinic.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------