Thread: [pgadmin-hackers] [pgAdmin4][PATCH] To fix the issue with displaying bigint[] values inquery tool

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Murtuza Zabuawala <murtuza.zabuawala@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

Hi,

PFA minor patch to fix the the issue with bigint[] array values as JS truncates long numbers from array object.

RM#2272

Hi

As far as I can see, this doesn't work as expected. The "bad" column is interpreted as numeric[] on my machine, which I assume needs to be added to the list as well? 

--

Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

That is strange.

I tested on PG9.6 and it was working properly, What is the your PG version? 

--

Regards,

Murtuza Zabuawala
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:06 PM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Murtuza Zabuawala <murtuza.zabuawala@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

Hi,

PFA minor patch to fix the the issue with bigint[] array values as JS truncates long numbers from array object.

RM#2272

Hi

As far as I can see, this doesn't work as expected. The "bad" column is interpreted as numeric[] on my machine, which I assume needs to be added to the list as well? 

--

Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Hi Dave,

Please test the patch with query provided by user,

SELECT ARRAY[48994717597666517,48968053424532376,76561198004879311,76561198078757065,76561198086825618]::text as good, 

ARRAY[48994717597666520,48968053424532376,76561198004879311,76561198078757065,76561198086825618] as bad

I was doing regression with some large arbitrary numbers due to which it was converting it to numeric[] and numeric[] is already handled in our code.

--

Regards,

Murtuza Zabuawala
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:18 PM, Murtuza Zabuawala <murtuza.zabuawala@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

That is strange.

I tested on PG9.6 and it was working properly, What is the your PG version? 

--

Regards,

Murtuza Zabuawala
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:06 PM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Murtuza Zabuawala <murtuza.zabuawala@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

Hi,

PFA minor patch to fix the the issue with bigint[] array values as JS truncates long numbers from array object.

RM#2272

Hi

As far as I can see, this doesn't work as expected. The "bad" column is interpreted as numeric[] on my machine, which I assume needs to be added to the list as well? 

--

Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Akshay, can you review/commit this please?

On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 6:35 AM, Murtuza Zabuawala <murtuza.zabuawala@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

Hi Dave,

Please test the patch with query provided by user,

SELECT ARRAY[48994717597666517,48968053424532376,76561198004879311,76561198078757065,76561198086825618]::text as good, 

ARRAY[48994717597666520,48968053424532376,76561198004879311,76561198078757065,76561198086825618] as bad

I was doing regression with some large arbitrary numbers due to which it was converting it to numeric[] and numeric[] is already handled in our code.

--

Regards,

Murtuza Zabuawala
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:18 PM, Murtuza Zabuawala <murtuza.zabuawala@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

That is strange.

I tested on PG9.6 and it was working properly, What is the your PG version? 

--

Regards,

Murtuza Zabuawala
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:06 PM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Murtuza Zabuawala <murtuza.zabuawala@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

Hi,

PFA minor patch to fix the the issue with bigint[] array values as JS truncates long numbers from array object.

RM#2272

Hi

As far as I can see, this doesn't work as expected. The "bad" column is interpreted as numeric[] on my machine, which I assume needs to be added to the list as well? 

--

Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

--

Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company