Patch applied. We now have a C version of initdb!
---
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> >Here is a slightly modified version of Andrew's great work in making a C
> >version of initdb. Other than minor
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Also, I see this at the top of the code:
* author: Andrew Dunstan mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Copyright (C) 2003 Andrew Dunstan
* Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2003, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
* Portions Copyrigh
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Consider also the strong likelihood that the data directory's parent
directory is owned by root,
Again, this directory recreate happens only on Win32, an I thought it
would be OK there.
Windows has no concept of director
Also, I see this at the top of the code:
* author: Andrew Dunstan mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Copyright (C) 2003 Andrew Dunstan
* Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2003, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
* Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of t
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Recreating the directory only happens on WIN32, where rmdir doesn't
> > allow you to only delete files and subdirectories and not the parent
> > directory. Non-Win32 does rm -rf dir/*.
>
> I think we should forget about invoking rm a
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Consider also the strong likelihood that the data directory's parent
> >> directory is owned by root,
>
> > Again, this directory recreate happens only on Win32, an I thought it
> > would be OK there.
>
> Windows has no concept of d
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Recreating the directory only happens on WIN32, where rmdir doesn't
> allow you to only delete files and subdirectories and not the parent
> directory. Non-Win32 does rm -rf dir/*.
I think we should forget about invoking rm as a subprocess at all, and
j
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Consider also the strong likelihood that the data directory's parent
>> directory is owned by root,
> Again, this directory recreate happens only on Win32, an I thought it
> would be OK there.
Windows has no concept of directory permissions at all? I
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan writes:
>
> > recreating the datadir if we didn't create it initially should be OK in
> > that case, and it makes the code simpler.
>
> That should be avoided, because you'll have trouble recreating the
> original directory with all its properties such as
Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Andrew Dunstan writes:
> >> recreating the datadir if we didn't create it initially should be OK in
> >> that case, and it makes the code simpler.
>
> > That should be avoided, because you'll have trouble recreating the
> > origina
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Andrew Dunstan writes:
>> recreating the datadir if we didn't create it initially should be OK in
>> that case, and it makes the code simpler.
> That should be avoided, because you'll have trouble recreating the
> original directory with all its prope
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> recreating the datadir if we didn't create it initially should be OK in
> that case, and it makes the code simpler.
That should be avoided, because you'll have trouble recreating the
original directory with all its properties such as ownership, permissions,
etc., at least
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> >Yes, I was concerned too that everything was in there. I checked the
> >initdb.sh logs and found that the only thing not added was the checking
> >of the max number of connections before checking the max number of
> >buffers, which I added.
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Yes, I was concerned too that everything was in there. I checked the
initdb.sh logs and found that the only thing not added was the checking
of the max number of connections before checking the max number of
buffers, which I added. The other stuff was in there. I also che
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
> >Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >
> >>It passes all the regression tests. I have also included a diff against
> >>Andrew's version so you can see my changes. It seems Andrew had a very
> >>current version of initdb. The only u
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Here is a slightly modified version of Andrew's great work in making a C
version of initdb. Other than minor cleanups, the only big change was
to remove rmdir handling because we using rm -r and rmdir /s in
commands/dbcommands.c, so we might as use the same thing for initdb
Bruce Momjian wrote:
It passes all the regression tests. I have also included a diff against
Andrew's version so you can see my changes. It seems Andrew had a very
current version of initdb. The only update he missed was the change to
test the number of connections before shared buffers --- I
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
It passes all the regression tests. I have also included a diff against
Andrew's version so you can see my changes. It seems Andrew had a very
current version of initdb. The only update he missed was the change to
test the number of
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It passes all the regression tests. I have also included a diff against
> Andrew's version so you can see my changes. It seems Andrew had a very
> current version of initdb. The only update he missed was the change to
> test the number of connections b
19 matches
Mail list logo
