Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-03-09 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 7:23 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > Thanks. Shouldn't this fix be back-patched? pg_visibility should fail > properly for indexes and other relkinds even in 9.6. pgstattuple can > also trigger failures. It would be confusing for users to face "could

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-03-09 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 9:34 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: >> Thanks. Shouldn't this fix be back-patched? pg_visibility should fail >> properly for indexes and other relkinds even in 9.6. pgstattuple can >> also trigger

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-03-09 Thread Stephen Frost
Michael, * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: > Thanks. Shouldn't this fix be back-patched? pg_visibility should fail > properly for indexes and other relkinds even in 9.6. pgstattuple can > also trigger failures. It would be confusing for users to face "could > not open file"

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-03-09 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 8:59 AM, Amit Langote wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > On 2017/03/10 6:48, Stephen Frost wrote: >> Amit, Michael, >> >> * Amit Langote (langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote: >>> On 2017/03/09 11:51, Michael Paquier wrote: OK, I am marking that

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-03-09 Thread Amit Langote
Hi Stephen, On 2017/03/10 6:48, Stephen Frost wrote: > Amit, Michael, > > * Amit Langote (langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote: >> On 2017/03/09 11:51, Michael Paquier wrote: >>> OK, I am marking that as ready for committer. >> >> Thanks. > > Thanks for this, I've pushed this now. I do have a

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-03-09 Thread Stephen Frost
Amit, Michael, * Amit Langote (langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote: > On 2017/03/09 11:51, Michael Paquier wrote: > > OK, I am marking that as ready for committer. > > Thanks. Thanks for this, I've pushed this now. I do have a few notes about changes that I made from your patch; - Generally

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-03-09 Thread Stephen Frost
Amit, Michael, * Amit Langote (langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote: > On 2017/03/09 11:51, Michael Paquier wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 5:10 PM, Amit Langote > > wrote: > >> On 2017/03/08 16:47, Michael Paquier wrote: > >>> Only regular tables are tested as

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-03-08 Thread Amit Langote
On 2017/03/09 11:51, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 5:10 PM, Amit Langote > wrote: >> On 2017/03/08 16:47, Michael Paquier wrote: >>> Only regular tables are tested as valid objects. Testing toast tables >>> is not worth the complication. Could you

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-03-08 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 5:10 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > On 2017/03/08 16:47, Michael Paquier wrote: >> Only regular tables are tested as valid objects. Testing toast tables >> is not worth the complication. Could you add as well a matview? > > Done in the attached

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-03-08 Thread Amit Langote
On 2017/03/08 16:47, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:15 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > +++ b/contrib/pg_visibility/expected/pg_visibility.out > @@ -0,0 +1,85 @@ > +CREATE EXTENSION pg_visibility; > +-- > +-- check that using the module's functions with unsupported relations will >

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-03-07 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:15 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > Sorry about the absence on this thread. No problems! Thanks for showing up with an updated patch. > On 2017/02/14 15:30, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 3:18 PM, Amit Langote wrote: >>> >>>

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-03-06 Thread Amit Langote
Sorry about the absence on this thread. On 2017/02/14 15:30, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 3:18 PM, Amit Langote wrote: >> >> Added more tests in pgstattuple and the new ones for pg_visibility, >> although I may have overdone the latter. > > A bonus idea is also to add tests

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-03-06 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 3:10 AM, Corey Huinker wrote: > Michael, do you want to add yourself as a reviewer? Yes, thanks for the reminder. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription:

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-03-06 Thread Corey Huinker
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 1:30 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > Hm... It may be a good idea to be consistent on the whole system and > refer to "partitioned table" as a table without storage and used as an > entry point for partitions. The docs use this term in CREATE TABLE,

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-02-13 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 3:18 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > On 2017/02/13 14:59, Michael Paquier wrote: > I see, thanks for explaining. Implemented that in the attached, also > fixing the errcode. Please see if that's what you had in mind. Yes. That's it, the overall

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-02-13 Thread Amit Langote
On 2017/02/13 14:59, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Amit Langote wrote: >> On 2017/02/10 14:32, Michael Paquier wrote: >>> The visibility checks are localized in pg_visibility.c and the storage >>> checks in pgstatindex.c, so yes we could have macros in those files. >>>

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > On 2017/02/10 14:32, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 7:21 AM, Corey Huinker >> wrote: > > Thanks Corey and Michael for the reviews! > >>> 1. should have these tests

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-02-09 Thread Amit Langote
On 2017/02/10 14:32, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 7:21 AM, Corey Huinker wrote: Thanks Corey and Michael for the reviews! >> 1. should have these tests named in core functions, like maybe: >> >> relation_has_visibility(Relation) >>

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-02-09 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 7:21 AM, Corey Huinker wrote: > Is this still needing a reviewer? Useful input is always welcome. > Code is quite clear. It does raise two questions: > > 1. should have these tests named in core functions, like maybe: > >

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-02-08 Thread Corey Huinker
On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 4:01 AM, Amit Langote wrote: > On 2017/01/24 15:35, Amit Langote wrote: > > On 2017/01/24 15:11, Michael Paquier wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Amit Langote > >> wrote: > >>> Some contrib

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-02-06 Thread Amit Langote
On 2017/01/24 15:35, Amit Langote wrote: > On 2017/01/24 15:11, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Amit Langote >> wrote: >>> Some contrib functions fail to fail sooner when relations of unsupported >>> relkinds are passed, resulting in error

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-01-23 Thread Amit Langote
On 2017/01/24 15:11, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Amit Langote > wrote: >> Some contrib functions fail to fail sooner when relations of unsupported >> relkinds are passed, resulting in error message like one below: >> >> create table foo

Re: [HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-01-23 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > Some contrib functions fail to fail sooner when relations of unsupported > relkinds are passed, resulting in error message like one below: > > create table foo (a int); > create view foov as select * from foo; >

[HACKERS] contrib modules and relkind check

2017-01-23 Thread Amit Langote
Some contrib functions fail to fail sooner when relations of unsupported relkinds are passed, resulting in error message like one below: create table foo (a int); create view foov as select * from foo; select pg_visibility('foov', 0); ERROR: could not open file "base/13123/16488": No such file