Re: [HACKERS] Cache lookup errors with functions manipulation object addresses

2017-08-09 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Aleksander Alekseev wrote: > I believe this patch is "Ready for Committer". > > The new status of this patch is: Ready for Committer Thanks for the lookup, but I think that this is still hasty as no discussion has happened about a couple

Re: [HACKERS] Cache lookup errors with functions manipulation object addresses

2017-08-09 Thread Aleksander Alekseev
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: make installcheck-world: tested, passed Implements feature: tested, passed Spec compliant: tested, passed Documentation:tested, passed I believe this patch is "Ready for Committer". The new

Re: [HACKERS] Cache lookup errors with functions manipulation object addresses

2017-08-03 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 8:53 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > I can see your point. The v1 proposed above adds quite a lot of error > code churn to deal with the lack of missing_ok flag in > getObjectDescription, getObjectIdentity and getObjectIdentityParts. > And the cache

Re: [HACKERS] Cache lookup errors with functions manipulation object addresses

2017-07-21 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 6:26 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 4:04 PM, Alvaro Herrera >> wrote: >> > I think the addition of checks everywhere for NULL return is worse. >> > Let's add a missing_ok

Re: [HACKERS] Cache lookup errors with functions manipulation object addresses

2017-07-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 4:04 PM, Alvaro Herrera > wrote: > > I think the addition of checks everywhere for NULL return is worse. > > Let's add a missing_ok flag instead, so that most callers can just trust > > that they get a non null value if

Re: [HACKERS] Cache lookup errors with functions manipulation object addresses

2017-07-20 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 4:04 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > I think the addition of checks everywhere for NULL return is worse. > Let's add a missing_ok flag instead, so that most callers can just trust > that they get a non null value if they don't want to deal with that >

Re: [HACKERS] Cache lookup errors with functions manipulation object addresses

2017-07-20 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Michael Paquier wrote: > - getObjectDescription and getObjectIdentity are called in quite a > couple of places. We could have those have a kind of missing_ok, but > as the status is just for adding cache lookup errors I have kept the > interface simple as this keeps the code in objectaddress.c

Re: [HACKERS] Cache lookup errors with functions manipulation object addresses

2017-07-20 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 7:29 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 2:25 AM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> Would we want to improve the error handling of such objects? > > +1 for such an improvement. Attached is a patch for all that.

Re: [HACKERS] Cache lookup errors with functions manipulation object addresses

2017-07-19 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 2:25 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > Would we want to improve the error handling of such objects? +1 for such an improvement. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers

[HACKERS] Cache lookup errors with functions manipulation object addresses

2017-07-19 Thread Michael Paquier
Hi all, Per an offline report from Moshe Jacobson, it is possible to trigger easily cache lookup errors using pg_describe_object with invalid object IDs and pg_describe_object(). I had a closer look at things in this area, to notice that there are other user-facing failures as many things use the