Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade's exec_prog() coding improvement

2012-08-31 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 08/24/2012 11:44 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Again, win32 testing would be welcome. Sadly, buildfarm does not run pg_upgrade's make check. Yesterday I added a new module to the buildfarm client code to run this

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade's exec_prog() coding improvement

2012-08-31 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 08/31/2012 10:52 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 08/24/2012 11:44 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Again, win32 testing would be welcome. Sadly, buildfarm does not run pg_upgrade's make check. Yesterday I added a new module to the buildfarm client code to run this

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade's exec_prog() coding improvement

2012-08-27 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Excerpts from Alvaro Herrera's message of vie ago 24 11:44:33 -0400 2012: Actually it seems better to just get rid of the extra varargs function and just have a single exec_prog. The extra NULL argument is not troublesome enough, it seems. Updated version attached. Applied (with some very

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade's exec_prog() coding improvement

2012-08-24 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 23.08.2012 23:07, Alvaro Herrera wrote: One problem with this is that I get this warning: /pgsql/source/HEAD/contrib/pg_upgrade/exec.c: In function ‘s_exec_prog’: /pgsql/source/HEAD/contrib/pg_upgrade/exec.c:96:2: warning: function might be possible candidate for ‘gnu_printf’ format

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade's exec_prog() coding improvement

2012-08-24 Thread Tom Lane
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes: On 23.08.2012 23:07, Alvaro Herrera wrote: One problem with this is that I get this warning: /pgsql/source/HEAD/contrib/pg_upgrade/exec.c: In function ‘s_exec_prog’: /pgsql/source/HEAD/contrib/pg_upgrade/exec.c:96:2: warning:

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade's exec_prog() coding improvement

2012-08-24 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 10:08:58AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes: On 23.08.2012 23:07, Alvaro Herrera wrote: One problem with this is that I get this warning: /pgsql/source/HEAD/contrib/pg_upgrade/exec.c: In function ‘s_exec_prog’:

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade's exec_prog() coding improvement

2012-08-24 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes: It sounds like it is suggestioning to use more specific attribute decoration. This might be relevant: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Warning-Options.html -Wmissing-format-attribute Warn about function pointers that

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade's exec_prog() coding improvement

2012-08-24 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Actually it seems better to just get rid of the extra varargs function and just have a single exec_prog. The extra NULL argument is not troublesome enough, it seems. Updated version attached. Again, win32 testing would be welcome. Sadly, buildfarm does not run pg_upgrade's make check. --

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade's exec_prog() coding improvement

2012-08-24 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 10:08 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes: On 23.08.2012 23:07, Alvaro Herrera wrote: One problem with this is that I get this warning: /pgsql/source/HEAD/contrib/pg_upgrade/exec.c: In function ‘s_exec_prog’: