--On 1. Oktober 2009 17:22:06 -0400 Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
- The patch as is has still some locking problems (AlterRoleSet()
has a XXX about that): I've managed to create dead entries for a
role or a database in pg_db_role_setting while altering and dropping
a
--On 1. Oktober 2009 17:22:06 -0400 Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
- ALTER ROLE ... IN DATABASE is missing some documentation. If you
want, i can work on this.
Please.
Here's a patch for this. I've kept it separately, so it's easier for you to
merge it into
your
--On 30. September 2009 13:19:53 -0400 Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
I think it would be helpful if you could post ONE patch with all the
changes and all the new files in the diff. AIUI, the patch is now
split across three separate emails. :-(
That's correct, here it
Bernd Helmle escribió:
--On 30. September 2009 13:19:53 -0400 Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
I think it would be helpful if you could post ONE patch with all the
changes and all the new files in the diff. AIUI, the patch is now
split across three separate emails. :-(
And here's the last necessary bit, which is pg_dump support for all
this.
--
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
*** src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dumpall.c 11 Jun 2009 14:49:07 - 1.126
---
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
And here's the last necessary bit, which is pg_dump support for all
this.
+ /* Dump role/database settings */
+ if (!tablespaces_only)
+ {
+ if (server_version = 80500)
+
Tom Lane escribió:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
And here's the last necessary bit, which is pg_dump support for all
this.
+ /* Dump role/database settings */
+ if (!tablespaces_only)
+ {
+ if (server_version =
Tom Lane escribió:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
And here's the last necessary bit, which is pg_dump support for all
this.
+ /* Dump role/database settings */
+ if (!tablespaces_only)
+ {
+ if (server_version =
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Tom Lane escribió:
Hmm ... I would kind of think that --roles-only should suppress this too.
Otherwise you're going to be dumping commands that might refer to
nonexistent databases.
Hmm. The problem I have with this idea is that the only way
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
And here's the last necessary bit, which is pg_dump support for all
this.
I think it would be helpful if you could post ONE patch with all the
changes and all the new files in the diff. AIUI, the patch is now
Tom Lane escribió:
BTW, have we thought much about the simplest possible solution,
which is to not have the view? How badly do we need it? Seems
like dropping the functionality into a psql \d command might be
a viable alternative.
FWIW I came up with a preliminary patch for a new psql
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
FWIW I came up with a preliminary patch for a new psql command \dus that
shows settings. It takes a pattern that's used to constrain on roles.
Thus there is no way to view settings for a database. If there's a need
for that we could use
Tom Lane escribió:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
FWIW I came up with a preliminary patch for a new psql command \dus that
shows settings. It takes a pattern that's used to constrain on roles.
Thus there is no way to view settings for a database. If there's a need
for
--On 28. September 2009 19:02:34 -0400 Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Seems Alvaro forgot to include pg_db_role_setting.h, it doesn't
compile anymore with this error:
Here they are.
I'll see if i can get to it tonight. I'm currently travelling, so it could
be delayed
--On 27. September 2009 21:59:37 -0400 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
wrote:
Bernd,
Can you review this new version and mark this as Ready for Committer
if it looks OK, or else respond with comments and set it back to
Waiting on Author?
Seems Alvaro forgot to include
On Sep 27, 2009, at 9:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
What we seem to be lacking in this case is a good tech-speak
option for the underlying catalog name. I'm still not happy
with having a catalog and a view that are exactly the same
except for s, especially since as Alvaro notes that won't
lead to
Bernd Helmle escribió:
Seems Alvaro forgot to include pg_db_role_setting.h, it doesn't
compile anymore with this error:
Huh, you're right, I did :-( Let me unpack the laptop ...
--
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command
Bernd Helmle escribió:
Seems Alvaro forgot to include pg_db_role_setting.h, it doesn't
compile anymore with this error:
Here they are.
--
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
/*
* pg_db_role_setting.c
*
On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 11:44 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Robert Haas escribió:
The problem of having both a table and a closely related view is,
IME, one that comes up a lot. I think you just need to pick a
convention and stick with it. Mine is to append _view to
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Alvaro Herrera escribió:
I think it can be solved by splitting OptRoleElem in a set of
productions for ALTER and a superset of that for ALTER. I'll go try
that.
Right, that works. Updated patch attached;
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
That seems to me to be just confusing the issue. Now the table name
and the view name are just totally different with no obvious
connection between them. We have enough nonsense of this type already
(e.g. pg_stats vs. pg_statistic; pg_authid vs.
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Right, that works. Updated patch attached; should solve the issues
raised in the thread. I renamed the catalog pg_db_role_setting as
suggested by Tom.
...
I have also added a view, whose only purpose is to convert the role and
database OIDs
On Sep 26, 2009, at 11:59 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Right, that works. Updated patch attached; should solve the issues
raised in the thread. I renamed the catalog pg_db_role_setting as
suggested by Tom.
...
I have also added a
Robert Haas escribió:
The problem of having both a table and a closely related view is,
IME, one that comes up a lot. I think you just need to pick a
convention and stick with it. Mine is to append _view to the
table name.
That would make the difference clear, but since what the user
Tom Lane escribió:
Gurjeet Singh singh.gurj...@gmail.com writes:
ON instead of second ALTER looks better, and IMHO DATABASE dbname should
be optional too:
ALTER ROLE rolename [ON DATABASE dbname] SET config TO value;
IN, not ON.
This creates a parser conflict with
CREATE ROLE foo IN
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Robert Haas escribió:
So here's the followup question - do you intend to do one of those
things for this CommitFest, or should we mark this as Returned with
Feedback once Bernd posts the rest of his review?
What feedback is it supposed to be
--On 23. September 2009 14:10:39 -0400 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
FWIW, I looked the patch over quickly, and I think it will be fine once
Bernd's comments are addressed. In particular I agree with the
objection to the name pg_setting as being confusingly close to
pg_settings. But
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Bernd Helmle maili...@oopsware.de wrote:
--On 23. September 2009 14:10:39 -0400 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
FWIW, I looked the patch over quickly, and I think it will be fine once
Bernd's comments are addressed. In particular I agree with the
--On 20. September 2009 22:56:53 -0400 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
wrote:
So is this ready to commit, or what?
Not yet, see the comments Alvaro did upthread. Please note that i'm still
reviewing this one and i hope to post results tomorrow (there wasn't plenty
of free time over
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 12:21 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Robert Haas escribió:
Here's a first shot on this for my current review round. Patch needed to
re-merged into current CVS HEAD due to some merge conflicts, i've also
adjusted the regression tests (minor). On
Robert Haas escribió:
So here's the followup question - do you intend to do one of those
things for this CommitFest, or should we mark this as Returned with
Feedback once Bernd posts the rest of his review?
What feedback is it supposed to be returned with? Precisely what I
wanted is some
Alvaro Herrera escribió:
What feedback is it supposed to be returned with? Precisely what I
wanted is some feedback on the general idea. Brendan's I like the
approach is good, but is it enough to deter a later veto from someone
else?
s/Brendan/Bernd/
--
Alvaro Herrera
--On 21. September 2009 13:42:21 +0200 Bernd Helmle maili...@oopsware.de
wrote:
--On 20. September 2009 22:56:53 -0400 Robert Haas
robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
So is this ready to commit, or what?
Not yet, see the comments Alvaro did upthread. Please note that i'm still
reviewing this
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Robert Haas escribió:
So here's the followup question - do you intend to do one of those
things for this CommitFest, or should we mark this as Returned with
Feedback once Bernd posts the rest of his review?
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 4:16 AM, Bernd Helmle maili...@oopsware.de wrote:
--On 21. September 2009 13:42:21 +0200 Bernd Helmle maili...@oopsware.de
wrote:
--On 20. September 2009 22:56:53 -0400 Robert Haas
robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
So is this ready to commit, or what?
Not yet,
Gurjeet Singh singh.gurj...@gmail.com writes:
ON instead of second ALTER looks better, and IMHO DATABASE dbname should
be optional too:
ALTER ROLE rolename [ON DATABASE dbname] SET config TO value;
IN, not ON.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Bernd Helmle maili...@oopsware.de wrote:
--On 25. August 2009 22:17:38 -0400 Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
I'm just posting in case somebody has thoughts on the UI part of it.
Other things that need fixed:
- need to figure out locking
Robert Haas escribió:
Here's a first shot on this for my current review round. Patch needed to
re-merged into current CVS HEAD due to some merge conflicts, i've also
adjusted the regression tests (minor). On a first look, i like the patch
(especially the code for the utility commands
--On 25. August 2009 22:17:38 -0400 Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
I'm just posting in case somebody has thoughts on the UI part of it.
Other things that need fixed:
- need to figure out locking for roles; this stuff must be synchronized
with role drop
- pg_shadow and
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Implementation-side, it requires a new catalog (pg_settings), with the
following columns:
So, I've come up with the attached patch. It does not have the new
command yet, so you can do ALTER USER and ALTER DATABASE and it works,
but there's no way to set
Hi,
There's a longstanding TODO item, in subject. Previous discussion was
here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-09/msg02341.php
In looking what it would take to implement it, I find that it is
trivial. The only part that looks complex is the UI for it. Is anyone
interested
41 matches
Mail list logo
