Alvaro Herrera writes:
> David Steele wrote:
>> Based on Tom's feedback, and hearing no opinions to the contrary, I have
>> marked this patch Rejected.
> I think I opine contrarywise, but I haven't made time to review the
> status of this in detail. I'm fine with keeping it rejected for now,
> b
Hi Álvaro,
On 3/6/18 10:25 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> David Steele wrote:
>
>> On 3/1/18 2:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>> TBH, I think we should reject this patch. While it's not huge,
>>> it's not trivial either, and I find the grammar changes rather ugly.
>>> The argument for using the feature
David Steele wrote:
> On 3/1/18 2:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > TBH, I think we should reject this patch. While it's not huge,
> > it's not trivial either, and I find the grammar changes rather ugly.
> > The argument for using the feature to fix pg_dump issues has evaporated,
> > but I don't see a
Hi Jing,
On 3/1/18 2:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jing Wang writes:
>> [ support_CURRENT_DATABASE_keyword_v4.7.patch ]
>
> TBH, I think we should reject this patch. While it's not huge,
> it's not trivial either, and I find the grammar changes rather ugly.
> The argument for using the feature to fi
Jing Wang writes:
> [ support_CURRENT_DATABASE_keyword_v4.7.patch ]
TBH, I think we should reject this patch. While it's not huge,
it's not trivial either, and I find the grammar changes rather ugly.
The argument for using the feature to fix pg_dump issues has evaporated,
but I don't see anythin
>Not surprisingly, this patch no longer applies in the wake of commit
>b3f840120. Rather than rebasing the pg_dump portions, I would suggest
>you just drop them.
It has been removed from the pg_dump codes.
>I notice some other patch application failures in dbcommands.c,
>objectaddress.c, and us
Jing Wang writes:
> [ support_CURRENT_DATABASE_keyword_v4.6.patch ]
Not surprisingly, this patch no longer applies in the wake of commit
b3f840120. Rather than rebasing the pg_dump portions, I would suggest
you just drop them. It is no longer necessary for pg_dump to worry about
this, because i
Hi Stephen and Thomas,
Thanks your review comments.
Enclosed please find the latest patch.
>/src/backend/parser/gram.y: In function ‘base_yyparse’:
>/src/backend/parser/gram.y:1160:19: warning: assignment from incompatible
pointer type [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
>| IN_P DATABASE db_spec_name
Greetings Jing,
* Jing Wang (jingwang...@gmail.com) wrote:
> I have rebased the patch on the latest version.
Thanks! Looks like there's still more work to be done here, and
unfortunately this ended up on a new thread somehow from the prior one.
I've added this newer thread to the CF app too.
>
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Jing Wang wrote:
> I have rebased the patch on the latest version.
Hi Jing,
According to my testing robot this fails make check-world (or
presumably cd src/bin/pg_dump ; make check), here:
t/001_basic.pl . ok
# Failed test 'binary_upgrade: dumps COMMENT
Hi,
I have rebased the patch on the latest version.
Because the CURRENT_DATABASE can not only being used on COMMENT ON
statement but also on other statements as following list so the patch name
is renamed to "support_CURRENT_DATABASE_keyword_vxx.patch".
1. COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABA
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 11:35 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Jing Wang wrote:
>> This is a patch for current_database working on ALTER ROLE/GRANT/REVOKE
>> statements which should be applied after the previous patch
>> "comment_on_current_database_no_pgdump_v4.4.pa
On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Jing Wang wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> This is a patch for current_database working on ALTER ROLE/GRANT/REVOKE
> statements which should be applied after the previous patch
> "comment_on_current_database_no_pgdump_v4.4.patch".
>
> By using the patch the CURRENT_DATABASE c
Hi All,
This is a patch for current_database working on ALTER ROLE/GRANT/REVOKE
statements which should be applied after the previous patch
"comment_on_current_database_no_pgdump_v4.4.patch".
By using the patch the CURRENT_DATABASE can working in the following SQL
statements:
ALTER ROLE ... IN D
Hi Nathan,
Thanks for review comments.
Enclosed please find the patch which has been updated according to your
suggestion.
The CURRENT_DATABASE can be used as following SQL statements and people can
find information from sgml files:
1. COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE is ...
2. ALTER
15 matches
Mail list logo