Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-03-04 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Sat, 4 Mar 2017 14:26:54 +0530 Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 7:21 PM, Karl O. Pinc <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > But if the code does not exit the loop then > > before calling elog(ERROR), shouldn't it > > also call FreeFile

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-03-03 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017 15:24:53 +0900 Michael Paquier wrote: > > + /* > +* No space found, file content is corrupted. Return > NULL to the > +* caller and inform him on the situation. > +*/ > + elog(ERROR, > +

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-02-15 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 15:23:00 -0500 Robert Haas wrote: > +ereport(WARNING, > +(errcode(ERRCODE_INTERNAL_ERROR), > + errmsg("corrupted data found in \"%s\"", > +LOG_METAINFO_DATAFILE))); > >

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-02-15 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 15:23:00 -0500 Robert Haas wrote: > + errhint("The supported log formats are > \"stderr\"" > +" and \"csvlog\"."))); > > I think our preferred style is not to break strings across lines like >

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-19 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Thu, 19 Jan 2017 12:12:18 -0300 Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Karl O. Pinc wrote: > > On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 19:27:40 -0300 > > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > > > I thought this part was odd -- I mean, why

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-19 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 19:27:40 -0300 Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Karl O. Pinc wrote: > > > @@ -511,10 +519,16 @@ int > > SysLogger_Start(void) > > { > > pid_t sysloggerPid; > > - char *filename; >

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-19 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Thu, 19 Jan 2017 16:59:10 +0900 Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 7:27 AM, Alvaro Herrera > wrote: > > I don't think the "abstract names" stuff is an improvement (just > > look at the quoting mess in ConfigureNamesString).

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-18 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 15:08:09 -0600 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > I would like to see index entries for "current_logfiles" > so this stuff is findable. Attached is a v27 of the patch. I polished some of the sentences in the documentation and add

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-18 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 15:52:36 -0500 Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Karl O. Pinc <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > Seems to me that the file format should > > be documented if there's any intention that the end user > > lo

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-18 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 11:08:23 -0600 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > Hi Micheal, > > On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 10:26:43 -0600 > "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > > > v26 patch attached which fixes this. > > I was gla

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-18 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Hi Micheal, On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 10:26:43 -0600 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > v26 patch attached which fixes this. I was glancing over the changes to the documentation you made between the v22 and v25 and from looking at the diffs it seems the format of the

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-18 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 10:11:20 -0600 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > You must write > errcode(ERRCODE_INTERNAL_ERROR) > instead of just > ERRCODE_INTERNAL_ERROR > > If you don't you get back 01000 for the error code. > v26 patch attached wh

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-18 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 13:26:46 +0900 Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Karl O. Pinc <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 11:08:25 +0900 > > Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: >

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-17 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 11:08:25 +0900 Michael Paquier wrote: > Our ideas rather map here, ERRCODE_INTERNAL_ERROR would be adapted for > this situation. Do any of you want to give it a shot or should I? You're welcome to it. Karl Free Software: "You

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-17 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Tue, 17 Jan 2017 23:00:43 +0100 Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > Le 17/01/2017 à 19:58, Karl O. Pinc a écrit : > > On Tue, 17 Jan 2017 19:06:22 +0100 > > Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > > > >> Le 17/01/2017 à 03:22

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-17 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Tue, 17 Jan 2017 19:06:22 +0100 Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > Le 17/01/2017 à 03:22, Michael Paquier a écrit : > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 2:21 AM, Karl O. Pinc <k...@meme.com> > > wrote: > >> On January 15, 2017 11:47:51 PM CST

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-17 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Tue, 17 Jan 2017 07:58:43 -0600 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > On Tue, 17 Jan 2017 11:22:45 +0900 > Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 2:21 AM, Karl O. Pinc <k...@meme.com> > > wrote: &g

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-17 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Tue, 17 Jan 2017 11:22:45 +0900 Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 2:21 AM, Karl O. Pinc <k...@meme.com> wrote: > >>Also, I would rather see an ERROR returned to the user in case of > >>bad data in current_logfi

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-16 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On January 15, 2017 11:47:51 PM CST, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: >On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Karl O. Pinc <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > >> Attached also are 2 patches which abstract some hardcoded >> constants into symbols.

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-16 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On January 15, 2017 11:47:51 PM CST, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: >On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Karl O. Pinc <k...@meme.com> wrote: >> I do have a question here regards code formatting. >> The patch now contains: >>

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-15 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Sun, 15 Jan 2017 07:20:40 -0600 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > On Sun, 15 Jan 2017 14:54:44 +0900 > Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I think that's all I have for this patch. > I'd like to submit with it an addendu

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-15 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Sun, 15 Jan 2017 14:54:44 +0900 Michael Paquier wrote: > I think that's all I have for this patch. I'd like to submit with it an addendum patch that makes symbols out of some constants. I'll see if I can get that done soon. Karl Free Software:

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2017-01-12 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Thu, 12 Jan 2017 13:14:28 +0100 Gilles Darold wrote: > My bad, I was thinking that Karl has planned an update of the patch in > his last post, sorry for my misunderstanding. I was, but have been swept along by events and not gotten to it. Karl

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-12-13 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Hi Gilles, I don't plan to be able to get back to this patch until late this week or early next week. My plan is to then go though the whole thing and fix everything I can find. If we're both working at the same time this could lead to wasted effort so I will write as soon as I start work and

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-12-10 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Sat, 10 Dec 2016 19:41:21 -0600 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > On Fri, 9 Dec 2016 23:36:12 -0600 > "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > > Instead I propose (code I have not actually executed): > > ... > > ch

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-12-10 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Fri, 9 Dec 2016 23:36:12 -0600 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > Instead I propose (code I have not actually executed): > ... > charlbuffer[MAXPGPATH]; > char*log_format = lbuffer; > ... > > /* extract log format and log file path from th

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-12-09 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Hi Gilles, On Fri, 9 Dec 2016 23:41:25 +0100 Gilles Darold wrote: > /* extract log format and log file path from the line */ > log_filepath = strchr(lbuffer, ' '); > log_filepath++; >

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-12-08 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 11:27:34 -0500 Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 11:02 PM, Karl O. Pinc <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > I read this and knew that I hadn't finished review, but didn't > > immediately respond because I thought the patch

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-12-07 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Hello Robert, On Wed, 7 Dec 2016 18:52:24 -0500 Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 6:11 PM, Gilles Darold > wrote: > > It seems that all fixes have been included in this patch. I read this and knew that I hadn't finished review, but

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-12-01 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Sun, 27 Nov 2016 21:54:46 +0100 Gilles Darold wrote: > I've attached the v15 of the patch > I've not applied patch patch_pg_current_logfile-v14.diff.backoff to > prevent constant call of logfile_writename() on a busy system (errno = > ENFILE | EMFILE). I don't

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-29 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Hi Gilles, On Sun, 27 Nov 2016 21:54:46 +0100 Gilles Darold wrote: > I've attached the v15 of the patch that applies your changes/fixes ... Per the following: On Mon, 21 Nov 2016 13:17:17 -0500 Robert Haas wrote: > It would really be much

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-28 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Hi Gilles, On Sun, 27 Nov 2016 21:54:46 +0100 Gilles Darold wrote: > I've attached the v15 of the patch that applies your changes/fixes and > remove the call to strtok(). I like the idea of replacing the strtok() call with sscanf() but I see problems. It won't work

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-27 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Sun, 27 Nov 2016 21:54:46 +0100 Gilles Darold wrote: > Again, patches patch_pg_current_logfile-v14.diff.doc_linux_default-v2 > have not been included because I don't see any reason to talk > especially about systemd. If you talk about systemd you must talk > about

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-24 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 23:08:18 -0600 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 03:21:05 -0600 > "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > > On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 12:58:47 +0100 > > Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalib

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-23 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 03:21:05 -0600 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 12:58:47 +0100 > Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > > > ... attached v14 of the patch. > patch_pg_current_logfile-v14.diff.retry_cu

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-23 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 10:39:28 -0500 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 4:21 AM, Karl O. Pinc <k...@meme.com> > > wrote: > >> The bool types on the stack in logfile_rotate() a

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-23 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 03:21:05 -0600 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > But also, you can't use strtok() to parse lbuffer because > the path you're returning can contain a space. Maybe on the 2nd call to strtok() you could pass "" as the 2nd argument? That

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-23 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Hi Gilles, On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 12:58:47 +0100 Gilles Darold wrote: > ... attached v14 of the patch. Attached are patches for your consideration and review. (Including your latest v14 patch for completeness.) Some of the attached patches (like the GUC symbol patch

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-21 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Mon, 21 Nov 2016 13:17:17 -0500 Robert Haas wrote: > > I've a couple of other patches that do > > a little cleanup on master that I'd also like to submit > > along with your patch. > It would really be much better to submit anything that's not > absolutely necessary

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-19 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 18:59:49 +0100 Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > Le 19/11/2016 à 16:22, Karl O. Pinc a écrit : > > Hi Gilles, > > > > On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 15:15:52 -0600 > > "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > >

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-19 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Hi Gilles, On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 15:15:52 -0600 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 7 Nov 2016 23:29:28 +0100 > > Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > > > - Do not write current_logfiles when log_collector is activated

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-19 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 12:58:47 +0100 Gilles Darold wrote: > All patches you've submitted on tha v13 patch have been applied and > are present in attached v14 of the patch. I have not included the > patches about GUC changes because I'm not sure that adding a new file >

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-17 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Hi Gilles, On Sun, 30 Oct 2016 02:04:59 -0500 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > Attached is a patch to be applied on top of your v10 patch > which does basic fixup to logfile_writename(). I'm looking at the v13 patch and don't see a change I submitted with a pa

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-16 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Mon, 7 Nov 2016 23:29:28 +0100 Gilles Darold wrote: > Here is the v13 of the patch, ... Attached is a doc patch to apply on top of v13. It adds a lot more detail regards just what is in the current_logfiles file and when it's in current_logfiles. I'd like review

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-15 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Mon, 7 Nov 2016 23:29:28 +0100 Gilles Darold wrote: > Here is the v13 of the patch, Just to keep things up to date... Attached are 3 re-worked patches that I see submitting along with the pg_current_logfile patch. They apply on top of v13. (I still have one more

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-15 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Sat, 12 Nov 2016 12:59:46 -0600 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > On Mon, 7 Nov 2016 23:29:28 +0100 > Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > > Here is the v13 of the patch, > > - Do not write current_logfiles when log_collector is a

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-12 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Mon, 7 Nov 2016 23:29:28 +0100 Gilles Darold wrote: > Here is the v13 of the patch, > - I've reverted the patch removing the call to logfile_writename in > open_csvlogfile function, it is required to write log filename at > startup when log_destination is set to

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-04 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Fri, 4 Nov 2016 16:58:45 +0100 Gilles Darold wrote: > I attached a v12 patch Attached is a comment patch which improves the comment describing CURRENT_LOG_FILENAME. It's been bugging me. I should have made this change long ago when I looked at all the other code

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-04 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Mon, 31 Oct 2016 10:19:18 +0100 Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > Le 31/10/2016 à 04:35, Karl O. Pinc a écrit : > > Attached is a patch to apply on top of the v10 patch. > > > > It updates current_logfiles only once per log rotation. > >

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-04 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Thu, 3 Nov 2016 18:34:50 -0500 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > On Mon, 31 Oct 2016 09:26:27 +0100 > Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > > > Le 30/10/2016 à 08:04, Karl O. Pinc a écrit : > > > > Ha

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-03 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Mon, 31 Oct 2016 09:26:27 +0100 Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > Le 30/10/2016 à 08:04, Karl O. Pinc a écrit : > > Have you given any thought to my proposal to change > > CURRENT_LOG_FILENAME to LOG_METAINFO_FILE? > Yes, I don't think the informa

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-02 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Wed, 2 Nov 2016 07:55:45 -0500 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2 Nov 2016 10:07:34 +0100 > Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > > > Please have a look at line 1137 on HEAD of syslogger.c > Ok. Thanks. Sorry for th

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-02 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Wed, 2 Nov 2016 10:07:34 +0100 Gilles Darold wrote: > Please have a look at line 1137 on HEAD of syslogger.c you will see > that in case of failure function logfile_open() report a FATAL or LOG > error with message: > > errmsg("could not open log file \"%s\":

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-11-01 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Mon, 31 Oct 2016 09:26:27 +0100 Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > Le 30/10/2016 à 08:04, Karl O. Pinc a écrit : > Attached patch v11 include your patch. > > > > > I have some questions about logfile_writename(): > > > > Why doe

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-30 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Hi Gilles, On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 22:00:08 +0200 Gilles Darold wrote: > The attached v10 of the current_logfiles patch Attached is a patch to apply on top of the v10 patch. It updates current_logfiles only once per log rotation. I see no reason to open and write the

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-30 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Tue, 28 Jun 2016 11:06:24 +0200 Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > Le 07/04/2016 08:30, Karl O. Pinc a écrit : > > "src/backend/postmaster/syslogger.c expects to see fopen() fail > > with > ENFILE and EMFILE. What will you do if you g

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-30 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 22:00:08 +0200 Gilles Darold wrote: > The attached v10 of the current_logfiles patch include your last > changes on documentation but not the patch on v9 about the > user-supplied GUC value. I think the v10 path is ready for committers > and that the

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-29 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:03:37 +0200 Gilles Darold wrote: > ... > v9 of the patch, attached here. Attached are 2 more documentation patchs to apply on top of your v9 patch. patch_pg_current_logfile-v9.diff.doc_current_logfiles Explains the current_logfiles file in the

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-28 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:03:37 +0200 Gilles Darold wrote: > ... > the v9 of the patch, attached here. I notice that there are a number of user-supplied GUC values for log_destination that are repeatedly used, both in the GUC code and in your patch. These are presently

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-27 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:03:11 +0200 Gilles Darold wrote: > The current v8 of the patch Perhaps instead of the define CURRENT_LOG_FILENAME a better name for the symbol would be LOG_METAINFO_FILE? Regards, Karl Free Software: "You don't pay back, you

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-27 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 22:09:41 -0500 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:03:11 +0200 > Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > > > The current v8 of the patch > > For your consideration. > > Attached is a

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-27 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Hi Gilles, On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:03:11 +0200 Gilles Darold wrote: > The current v8 of the patch For your consideration. Attached is a patch to apply to v8 of your patch. I moved the call to logfile_writename() in write_syslogger_file() into the open_csvlogfile().

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-27 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:03:11 +0200 Gilles Darold wrote: > The current v8 of the patch Attached is a patch to the v8 version of your patch. It rewords some of the comments in the code. Take the hunks or leave them as you wish. Regards, Karl Free

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-27 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 16:18:02 -0500 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:03:11 +0200 > Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > > > The current v8 of the patch > > Attached is a doc patch for your v8 patch. >

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-27 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:03:11 +0200 Gilles Darold wrote: > The current v8 of the patch Attached is a doc patch for your v8 patch. Added , so the docs would build. Added markup of "system values". Hope to look at code soon! Karl Free Software: "You

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-27 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:57:18 +0200 Christoph Berg <m...@debian.org> wrote: > Re: Karl O. Pinc 2016-10-27 <20161027121141.6bd95...@slate.meme.com> > > SELECT * from postgres.pg_current_logfile; > We were discussing exactly that idea upthread before concluding that a

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-27 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:03:11 +0200 Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > >> Re: Karl O. Pinc 2016-10-27 > >> <20161026222513.74cd3...@slate.meme.com> > > Your comment makes me wonder if pg_current_logfile(), without > > arguments, should

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-27 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 11:07:43 +0200 Christoph Berg <m...@debian.org> wrote: > Re: Karl O. Pinc 2016-10-27 <20161026222513.74cd3...@slate.meme.com> > > But what if current_logfile contains only a single line? What > > sort of file format does the logfile have? If y

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-26 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 00:31:56 +0200 Gilles Darold wrote: > Thanks a lot for the documentation fixes, I've also patched some of > your changes, see v7 of the patch and explanations bellow. Thanks. Sorry if I've not kept up on your latest decisions. > > Put pg_log_file

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-25 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 22:30:48 -0500 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > Since pg_log_file may contain only one line, and that > line may be either the filename of the csv log file or > the file name of the stderr file name it's impossible > to tell whether that sin

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-25 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Another new version of a doc patch to the v6 patch. More better English. *sigh* Regards, Karl Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward." -- Robert A. Heinlein patch_pg_current_logfile-v6.diff.patchv4 Description: Binary data -- Sent via

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-25 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 22:53:41 -0500 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 22:30:48 -0500 > "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > > Hope to provide more feedback soon. Er, attached is yet another doc patch to the v6 patch

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-25 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 22:30:48 -0500 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > Hope to provide more feedback soon. Before I forget: "make check" fails, due to oid issues with pg_current_logfile(). You're writing Unix eol characters into pg_log_file. (I think.) D

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-25 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 14:18:36 +0200 Gilles Darold wrote: > Here is the v6 of the patch, here is the description of the > pg_current_logfile() function, I have tried to keep thing as simple as > possible: > > pg_current_logfile( [ destination text ] ) >

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-10-03 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Mon, 3 Oct 2016 13:35:16 +0900 Michael Paquier wrote: > > Moved to next CF, the patch still applies. Karl, you have registered > to review this patch a couple of months back but nothing happened. I > have removed your name for now. If you have time, don't hesitate

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-07-01 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Tue, 28 Jun 2016 11:06:24 +0200 Gilles Darold wrote: > Thank you very much for the patch review and please apologies this too > long response delay. I was traveling since end of April and totally > forgotten this patch. I have applied all your useful feedbacks on the

Re: [HACKERS] PQsendQuery+PQgetResult+PQsetSingleRowMode limitations and support

2016-04-11 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 19:25:20 +0200 "Shulgin, Oleksandr" <oleksandr.shul...@zalando.de> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Karl O. Pinc <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > > Not sure about the part > > > where you call PQsetSingleRowMode() again after

Re: [HACKERS] PQsendQuery+PQgetResult+PQsetSingleRowMode limitations and support

2016-04-11 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 15:55:53 +0200 "Shulgin, Oleksandr" <oleksandr.shul...@zalando.de> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 7:53 PM, Karl O. Pinc <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 05:57:33 +0200 > > "Shulgin, Oleksandr" <oleksan

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-04-07 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 01:13:51 -0500 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 23:37:09 -0500 > "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 22:26:13 -0500 > > "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com>

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-04-07 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 23:37:09 -0500 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 22:26:13 -0500 > "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 23:22:26 +0100 > > Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wro

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-04-06 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 22:26:13 -0500 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 23:22:26 +0100 > Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > > > Thanks for the reminder, here is the v3 of the patch after a deeper > > review and testi

Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

2016-04-06 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Hi Gilles, On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 23:22:26 +0100 Gilles Darold wrote: > Thanks for the reminder, here is the v3 of the patch after a deeper > review and testing. It is now registered to the next commit fest under > the System Administration topic. I am going to try

Re: [HACKERS] PQsendQuery+PQgetResult+PQsetSingleRowMode limitations and support

2016-04-01 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 05:57:33 +0200 "Shulgin, Oleksandr" <oleksandr.shul...@zalando.de> wrote: > On Apr 1, 2016 02:57, "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@meme.com> wrote: > > > > I assume there are no questions about supporting a > > similar function

[HACKERS] PQsendQuery+PQgetResult+PQsetSingleRowMode limitations and support

2016-03-31 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Hi, Bruce Momjian suggested I write and ask about using libpq to submit multiple SQL statements to the backend, and then get results for each of the submitted statements, row-by-row without server-side caching of the results. Bruce wrote: > I think this would be good > to post to hackers to get

Re: [HACKERS] backup.sgml-cmd-v003.patch

2013-11-08 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On 11/08/2013 02:12:56 PM, Robert Haas wrote: On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com wrote: superuser privileges; it's the selective-dump case where you can often get by without them. I've attached a proposed patch along these lines for your

Re: [HACKERS] backup.sgml-cmd-v003.patch

2013-11-08 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On 11/08/2013 03:42:56 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: On 11/08/2013 12:18 PM, Karl O. Pinc wrote: On 11/08/2013 02:12:56 PM, Robert Haas wrote: On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com wrote: Should I go ahead and apply that portion, then? I am certainly

Re: [HACKERS] backup.sgml-cmd-v003.patch

2013-09-27 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Hi Robert, On 09/27/2013 05:56:52 AM, Robert Haas wrote: 1. Attempting to encourage people to consider custom format dumps. What's important is what you can do... Your critique seems obvious in retrospect. Sorry you had to step in here and do my job. The above point is particularly

Re: [HACKERS] backup.sgml-cmd-v003.patch

2013-09-26 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On 09/26/2013 12:15:25 PM, Ivan Lezhnjov IV wrote: On Sep 3, 2013, at 6:56 AM, Karl O. Pinc k...@meme.com wrote: On 07/31/2013 12:08:12 PM, Ivan Lezhnjov IV wrote: Patch filename: backup.sgml-cmd-v003.patch The third version of this patch takes into consideration feedback

Re: [HACKERS] backup.sgml-cmd-v003.patch

2013-09-02 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On 09/02/2013 10:56:54 PM, Karl O. Pinc wrote: I have frobbed your programlisting to adjust the indentation and line-wrap style. Oops. Somehow left a \ out of this. Anyhow, you get the idea. Karl k...@meme.com Free Software: You don't pay back, you pay forward

Re: [HACKERS] updatable/deletable terminology

2013-08-07 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On 08/07/2013 08:19:03 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: We have these two error messages: To make the view updatable, provide an unconditional ON UPDATE DO INSTEAD rule or an INSTEAD OF UPDATE trigger. and To make the view updatable, provide an unconditional ON DELETE DO INSTEAD rule or an

[HACKERS] Doc Patch: Subquery section to say that subqueries can't modify data

2013-08-06 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Hi, The attached documentation patch, doc-subqueries-v1.patch, applies against head. I wanted to document that subqueries can't modify data. This is mentioned in the documentation for SELECT and implied elsewhere but I was looking for something more than an 'in-passing' mention. (I wrote a

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Doc Patch: Subquery section to say that subqueries can't modify data

2013-08-06 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Good points. On 08/06/2013 05:15:28 PM, David Johnston wrote: Instead of simply expanding the section on sub-queries, which may still be worthwhile, it seems that we have effectively introduced a new kind of query - namely one that mixes both query DDL and update DDL into a kind of hybrid

Re: [HACKERS] Make targets of doc links used by phpPgAdmin static

2013-06-06 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On 06/05/2013 09:13:45 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 22:27 -0500, Karl O. Pinc wrote: On 06/04/2013 10:16:20 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On Tue, 2013-05-07 at 23:18 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Peter Eisentraut wrote: On Tue, 2013-05-07 at 00:32 -0500, Karl O

Re: [HACKERS] Make targets of doc links used by phpPgAdmin static

2013-06-04 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On 06/04/2013 10:16:20 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On Tue, 2013-05-07 at 23:18 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Peter Eisentraut wrote: On Tue, 2013-05-07 at 00:32 -0500, Karl O. Pinc wrote: Attached is a documentation patch against head which makes static the targets of the on-line PG

[HACKERS] Make targets of doc links used by phpPgAdmin static

2013-05-06 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Hi, Attached is a documentation patch against head which makes static the targets of the on-line PG html documentation that are referenced by the phpPgAdmin help system. Apply with patch -p1 at the top of the pg code tree. The phpPgAdmin project is a web interface into PG. It contains help

Re: [HACKERS] Doc patch, normalize search_path in index

2013-01-25 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On 01/25/2013 12:35:49 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes: I have applied a modified version of your patch that creates separate secondary index references for search_path. This patch seems pretty bizarre. What is the difference between a configuration parameter

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] PL/Python: Add spidata to all spiexceptions

2013-01-09 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On 01/09/2013 01:08:39 PM, Jan Urbański wrote: I can see arguments to be made for both sides. I'm asking that you think it through to the extent you deem necessary and make changes or not. At that point it should be ready to send to a committer. (I'll re-test first, if you make any

Re: [HACKERS] Submission Review: User control over psql error stream

2012-12-31 Thread Karl O. Pinc
Hi Allastair, On 12/28/2012 02:33:03 PM, Alastair Turner wrote: Sorry for the slow reply ... Such is life. The discussion needs to be a little broader than stdout and stderr, there are currently three output streams from psql: - stdout - prompts, not tabular output such as the results

Re: [HACKERS] Doc patch, further describe and-mask nature of the permission system

2012-12-16 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On 12/16/2012 12:56:22 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On Mon, 2012-12-10 at 20:48 -0600, Karl O. Pinc wrote: On 11/14/2012 02:35:54 PM, Karl O. Pinc wrote: On 11/13/2012 08:50:55 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On Sat, 2012-09-29 at 01:16 -0500, Karl O. Pinc wrote: This patch makes some

Re: [HACKERS] Add big fat caution to pg_restore docs regards partial db restores

2012-12-16 Thread Karl O. Pinc
On 12/16/2012 12:51:06 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: I'm going to set this patch as returned with feedback for now. Ok. At this point I don't have a vision for improving it so it might sit there untouched. Maybe someone else will step forward and make it better. Regards, Karl k...@meme.com

  1   2   >