Re: [PATCHES] [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/src backend/main/main.c backend/p

Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Also, in the non-exec case it seems unnecessary and possibly unsafe to >> repeat this computation in a backend. > Thanks. It originally was as below and I forgot about that. It now is: > if (my_exec_path[0] == '\0' && find_my_exe

Re: [PATCHES] [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/src backend/main/main.c backend/p

Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> Also, in the non-exec case it seems unnecessary and possibly unsafe to > >> repeat this computation in a backend. > > > Thanks. It originally was as below and I forgot about that. It now is: > > if (my_exec_

Re: [PATCHES] [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/src backend/main/main.c backend/p

Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > OK, I moved the find_my_exec calls to the locations you mentioned in > > both postgres.c and postmaster.c and remove it from main.c. I tested > > the elog and it worked. > > You omitted get_pkglib_path() from the postmaster case; was

Re: [PATCHES] [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/src backend/main/main.c backend/p

Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > OK, I moved the find_my_exec calls to the locations you mentioned in > both postgres.c and postmaster.c and remove it from main.c. I tested > the elog and it worked. You omitted get_pkglib_path() from the postmaster case; was that intentional? Also, in

Re: [PATCHES] [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/src backend/main/main.c backend/p

Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> And tested? I didn't say that I thought elog would work in main.c. > >> In fact I'm pretty certain it won't. > > > Compiles/regression tests pass. > > You need to test the cases that will produce elog output.

Re: [PATCHES] [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/src backend/main/main.c backend/p ...

Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> And tested? I didn't say that I thought elog would work in main.c. >> In fact I'm pretty certain it won't. > Compiles/regression tests pass. You need to test the cases that will produce elog output. > This is why I removed elog in

Re: [PATCHES] [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/src backend/main/main.c backend/p ...

> > > so it has to be earlier. I can put it much earlier in > both postgres > > > and postmaster, but by having it in main.c, I have it in only one > > > place. It doesn't do any palloc or anything fancy, because of > > > course it is also used by client apps. > > > > > Patch attached and ap

Re: [PATCHES] [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/src backend/main/main.c backend/p ...

Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > so it has to be earlier. I can put it much earlier in both postgres and > > postmaster, but by having it in main.c, I have it in only one place. It > > doesn't do any palloc or anything fancy, because of course it is also > > used by

Re: [PATCHES] [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/src backend/main/main.c backend/p ...

Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > so it has to be earlier. I can put it much earlier in both postgres and > postmaster, but by having it in main.c, I have it in only one place. It > doesn't do any palloc or anything fancy, because of course it is also > used by client apps. > Patch att

Re: [PATCHES] [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/src backend/main/main.c backend/p ...

Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Momjian) writes: > >>> Remove elog() calls from find_my_exec; do fprintf(stderr) instead. > >> > >> Isn't that a seriously bad idea? > > > Yes, it probably is bad, but I am not sure how