Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-10-03 17:16, Andres Freund wrote: On 2015-10-03 17:15:54 +0200, Andres Freund wrote: Here's an updated patch. Petr, could you please expand the test to handle a bit more complex cascading setups? Okay, I changed the test to make the dependencies bit more complex - more than one

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-10-03 17:15:54 +0200, Andres Freund wrote: > Here's an updated patch. Petr, could you please expand the test to > handle a bit more complex cascading setups? ... >From fa11dc75500eb91b68baeeb07a00a789ed0050b3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Andres Freund Date: Sat, 3

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-09-20 16:38:58 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: > Here it is. I went over the patch, trying to commit it. Changed a bunch of stylistic issues (comments, NOTICE location, ...) . But also found a bug: Namely cascade_parent was set wrongly in a bunch of situations: When an extension has multiple

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-10-03 17:56:07 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 2015-10-03 17:16, Andres Freund wrote: > >On 2015-10-03 17:15:54 +0200, Andres Freund wrote: > >>Here's an updated patch. Petr, could you please expand the test to > >>handle a bit more complex cascading setups? > > > > Okay, I changed the

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2015-09-20 16:38:58 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: > Michael: Why did you exclude test_extensions in Mkvcbuild.pm? test_extensions contains nothing that should be compiled, only things that should be installed. --

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-09-18 04:52, Petr Jelinek wrote: On 2015-09-17 17:31, Jeff Janes wrote: If I fail to specify CASCADE and get an ERROR, I think there should be a HINT which suggests the use of CASCADE. create extension earthdistance ; ERROR: required extension "cube" is not installed (no hint)

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On Sep 17, 2015 7:52 PM, "Petr Jelinek" wrote: > > On 2015-09-17 17:31, Jeff Janes wrote: >> >> >> Also, It would be nice to have psql tab complete the word CASCADE. >> > > Hmm, it already does? Indeed it does. Oops. I need to run the program I just compiled, and not some

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 2015-09-08 04:06, Michael Paquier wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Michael Paquier >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Attached are as well changes for the documentation that I spotted in >>>

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-09-17 17:31, Jeff Janes wrote: If I fail to specify CASCADE and get an ERROR, I think there should be a HINT which suggests the use of CASCADE. create extension earthdistance ; ERROR: required extension "cube" is not installed (no hint) There is a HINT on the reverse operation:

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-09-16 05:44:22 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 2015-09-08 04:06, Michael Paquier wrote: > >On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Michael Paquier > > wrote: > >> > >>Attached are as well changes for the documentation that I spotted in > >>earlier reviews but were not

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

Andres Freund wrote: > > @@ -91,8 +92,38 @@ CREATE EXTENSION [ IF NOT EXISTS ] > class="parameter">extension_name > > The name of the schema in which to install the extension's > > objects, given that the extension allows its contents to be > > relocated. The named

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-09-16 19:46:10 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Andres Freund wrote: > > > > @@ -91,8 +92,38 @@ CREATE EXTENSION [ IF NOT EXISTS ] > > class="parameter">extension_name > > > The name of the schema in which to install the extension's > > > objects, given that the extension

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-09-08 04:06, Michael Paquier wrote: On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: Attached are as well changes for the documentation that I spotted in earlier reviews but were not included in the last version sent by Petr yesterday. Feel free to

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 6:14 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote: >> Attached patch uses just boolean in cascade DefElem and splits the >> CreateExtension into two functions, the cascade code now calls the >>

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 6:14 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > Attached patch uses just boolean in cascade DefElem and splits the > CreateExtension into two functions, the cascade code now calls the > CreateExtensionInternal. One thing though - I am passing the DefElems > directly to the cascaded

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-09-07 21:28, Petr Jelinek wrote: On 2015-09-07 21:09, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Andres Freund wrote: On 2015-09-07 20:56:50 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: Yes that sounds cleaner. Just as a side note, List is a Node and does have copy support (and we pass List as DefElem->arg from gram.y in

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-09-02 17:31, Andres Freund wrote: On 2015-09-02 17:27:38 +0200, Andres Freund wrote: 1) Passing the list of parents through the cascade DefElem strikes me as incredibly ugly. For one the cascade option really should take a true/false type option on the C level (so you can do

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-09-07 20:56:50 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: > Yes that sounds cleaner. Just as a side note, List is a Node and does have > copy support (and we pass List as DefElem->arg from gram.y in several > places). I know - but the list element in this case don't have copy support, no? You seem to

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-09-07 16:09:27 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2015-09-07 20:56:50 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: > > > Yes that sounds cleaner. Just as a side note, List is a Node and does have > > > copy support (and we pass List as DefElem->arg from gram.y in several > > >

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-09-07 21:09, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Andres Freund wrote: On 2015-09-07 20:56:50 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: Yes that sounds cleaner. Just as a side note, List is a Node and does have copy support (and we pass List as DefElem->arg from gram.y in several places). I know - but the list

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

Andres Freund wrote: > On 2015-09-07 20:56:50 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: > > Yes that sounds cleaner. Just as a side note, List is a Node and does have > > copy support (and we pass List as DefElem->arg from gram.y in several > > places). > > I know - but the list element in this case don't have

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

Hi, I'm looking at committing this patch. I found some nitpick-level things that I can easily fixup. But I dislike two things: 1) Passing the list of parents through the cascade DefElem strikes me as incredibly ugly. For one the cascade option really should take a true/false type option on the

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-09-02 17:27:38 +0200, Andres Freund wrote: > 1) Passing the list of parents through the cascade DefElem strikes me as > incredibly ugly. > > For one the cascade option really should take a true/false type option > on the C level (so you can do defGetBoolean()), for another passing >

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-07-31 03:03, Michael Paquier wrote: On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: On 2015-07-27 15:18, Michael Paquier wrote: Something also has not been discussed yet: what to do with new_version and old_version (the options of CreateExtensionStmt)? As of now if those options

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-07-27 15:18, Michael Paquier wrote: On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 1:01 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote: Yes that's what I meant by the change of checking order in the explanation above. I did that because I thought code would be more complicated otherwise, but apparently I was stupid... +In

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: On 2015-07-27 15:18, Michael Paquier wrote: Something also has not been discussed yet: what to do with new_version and old_version (the options of CreateExtensionStmt)? As of now if those options are defined they are not passed down to the

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 1:01 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote: Yes that's what I meant by the change of checking order in the explanation above. I did that because I thought code would be more complicated otherwise, but apparently I was stupid... +In case the extension specifies schema in its

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-07-25 14:37, Michael Paquier wrote: On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 2015-07-22 07:12, Michael Paquier wrote: On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com writes: ... My main

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 2015-07-22 07:12, Michael Paquier wrote: On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com writes: ... My main question is if we are ok with SCHEMA having

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-07-22 07:12, Michael Paquier wrote: On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com writes: ... My main question is if we are ok with SCHEMA having different behavior with CASCADE vs without CASCADE. I went originally with no and

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com writes: ... My main question is if we are ok with SCHEMA having different behavior with CASCADE vs without CASCADE. I went originally with no and added the DEFAULT flag to SCHEMA. If the

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 10:29 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: In short I would give up on the DEFAULT SCHEMA business, and add a new flag in the control file to decide if a given extension passes down the schema name of its child

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 10:29 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: In short I would give up on the DEFAULT SCHEMA business, and add a new flag in the control file to decide if a given extension passes down the schema name of its child when created in cascade, default being true

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-07-21 15:48, Tom Lane wrote: Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 10:29 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: In short I would give up on the DEFAULT SCHEMA business, and add a new flag in the control file to decide if a given extension

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com writes: ... My main question is if we are ok with SCHEMA having different behavior with CASCADE vs without CASCADE. I went originally with no and added the DEFAULT flag to SCHEMA. If the answer is yes then we don't need the flag (in that case CASCADE acts

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-07-19 17:16, Michael Paquier wrote: On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 2015-07-15 06:07, Michael Paquier wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de writes: On July 10, 2015

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 10:20 PM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 2015-07-19 17:16, Michael Paquier wrote: On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 2015-07-15 06:07, Michael Paquier wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Tom Lane

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 2015-07-15 06:07, Michael Paquier wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de writes: On July 10, 2015 4:16:59 PM GMT+02:00, Tom Lane

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de writes: On July 10, 2015 4:16:59 PM GMT+02:00, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Would that propagate down through multiple levels of CASCADE? (Although I'm not sure it would be sensible for

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 10:14:49AM -0700, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Jul 7, 2015, at 6:41 AM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote: At the minimum I'd like to see that CREATE EXTENSION foo; would install install extension 'bar' if foo dependended on 'bar' if CASCADE is specified. Right

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 07/09/2015 07:05 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: On 2015-07-07 15:41, Andres Freund wrote: On 2015-07-07 22:36:29 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:50 AM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Hi, I am getting tired installing manually required extensions manually. I was

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de writes: On July 10, 2015 4:16:59 PM GMT+02:00, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Would that propagate down through multiple levels of CASCADE? (Although I'm not sure it would be sensible for a non-relocatable extension to depend on a relocatable one, so maybe

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com writes: On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi This seems quite reasonable, but I have to ask: How many extensions are there out there that depend on another extension? Off the top of my head, I can't think of any.. With

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On July 10, 2015 4:16:59 PM GMT+02:00, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de writes: I think we should copy the SCHEMA option here and document that we use the same schema. But it needs to be done in a way that doesn't error out if the extension is not

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-06-15 00:50:08 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: + /* Create and execute new CREATE EXTENSION statement. */ + ces = makeNode(CreateExtensionStmt); + ces-extname = curreq; +

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

10 июля 2015 г., в 16:09, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi написал(а): On 07/09/2015 07:05 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: On 2015-07-07 15:41, Andres Freund wrote: On 2015-07-07 22:36:29 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:50 AM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Hi,

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de writes: I think we should copy the SCHEMA option here and document that we use the same schema. But it needs to be done in a way that doesn't error out if the extension is not relocatable... Would that propagate down through multiple levels of CASCADE?

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-07-07 15:41, Andres Freund wrote: On 2015-07-07 22:36:29 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:50 AM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Hi, I am getting tired installing manually required extensions manually. I was wondering if we might want to add option to

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On Jul 7, 2015, at 6:41 AM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote: At the minimum I'd like to see that CREATE EXTENSION foo; would install install extension 'bar' if foo dependended on 'bar' if CASCADE is specified. Right now we always error out saying that the dependency on 'bar' is not

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On 2015-07-07 22:36:29 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:50 AM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Hi, I am getting tired installing manually required extensions manually. I was wondering if we might want to add option to CREATE SEQUENCE that would allow

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:50 AM, Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Hi, I am getting tired installing manually required extensions manually. I was wondering if we might want to add option to CREATE SEQUENCE that would allow automatic creation of the extensions required by the extension

Re: [HACKERS] creating extension including dependencies

+1 Is it working in runtime too? Dne 15.6.2015 0:51 napsal uživatel Petr Jelinek p...@2ndquadrant.com: Hi, I am getting tired installing manually required extensions manually. I was wondering if we might want to add option to CREATE SEQUENCE that would allow automatic creation of the