Re: ready for some testing

On Nov 26, 2003, at 21:59, Russell Valentine wrote:

>> So I made the query work although (without $user_options, or
>> $ORDER_BY_LIST). This is the query I came up with.I didn't check
>> $user_options or $ORDER_BY_LIST but I'll check on that later hope this
>> helps for now.
>
> 1) PostgreSQL doesn't like && it wants 'and'
>
> includes/functions.inc.php:
> -----------------
> function z_MysqlDateRange($fieldName,$SourceArray)
> {
>     // code for this function under GPL and contributed/copyright
>     // by Ali Ziad
>     $fromDate = z_FormatFormDate("Ymd000000",$fieldName 
> .'_from',$SourceArray);
>     $toDate   = z_FormatFormDate("Ymd000000",$fieldName 
> .'_to',$SourceArray);
>     $result   = " ( (bugs.$fieldName >= $fromDate) and 
> (bugs.$fieldName<=$toDate) ) ";
>     return($result);
> }
> ------------------

Fixed in CVS (rev 1.108)

> With the limited testing I did, I couldn't break Advanced Query. I've 
> been
> testing this with only one bug in the database, so shouuld still check 
> it
> out.

Definitely good to hear.  =)

Out of curiousity, did you every play with Anthill using mysql?  I'm 
curious on your thoughts as to wether you think the postgres backend is 
faster.  It seems faster to me, but I can't bench it properly yet 
because my Linux laptop (AMD 2400+XP with 512MB RAM) is running 
postgres whereas my OS X laptop (1GHz with 1GB RAM) is using MySQL.. 
but the postgres one seems faster to me.

---
MandrakeSoft Security; http://www.mandrakesecure.net/
Online Security Resource Book; http://linsec.ca/
"lynx -source http://linsec.ca/vdanen.asc | gpg --import"
{FE6F2AFD : 88D8 0D23 8D4B 3407 5BD7  66F9 2043 D0E5 FE6F 2AFD}

_______________________________________________
Anthill-workers mailing list
Anthill-workers-+mQDA36h6dWw5LPnMra/[email protected]
http://vmlinuz.ca/mailman/listinfo/anthill-workers