[PATCHES] default database creation with initdb
As per discussion on -hackers the attached patch creates the 'default'
database at initdb time as a default target for initial connections to
keep template1 free from connections and available as template source.
I consider this DB a system object, so it's created before
make_template0 sets the last_system_oid (wondering why template0 isn't
considered a system db too)
Regards,
Andreas
Index: src/bin/initdb/initdb.c
===
RCS file: /projects/cvsroot/pgsql/src/bin/initdb/initdb.c,v
retrieving revision 1.83
diff -u -r1.83 initdb.c
--- src/bin/initdb/initdb.c 30 Apr 2005 08:08:51 - 1.83
+++ src/bin/initdb/initdb.c 18 Jun 2005 08:37:16 -
@@ -177,6 +177,7 @@
static void set_info_version(void);
static void setup_schema(void);
static void vacuum_db(void);
+static void make_default(void);
static void make_template0(void);
static void trapsig(int signum);
static void check_ok(void);
@@ -1828,6 +1829,38 @@
}
/*
+ * copy template1 to pg_system
+ */
+static void
+make_default(void)
+{
+ PG_CMD_DECL;
+ char **line;
+ static char *pg_system_setup[] = {
+ "CREATE DATABASE \"default\";\n",
+ "REVOKE CREATE,TEMPORARY ON DATABASE \"default\" FROM
public;\n",
+ NULL
+ };
+
+ fputs(_("copying template1 to default ... "), stdout);
+ fflush(stdout);
+
+ snprintf(cmd, sizeof(cmd),
+"\"%s\" %s template1 >%s",
+backend_exec, backend_options,
+DEVNULL);
+
+ PG_CMD_OPEN;
+
+ for (line = pg_system_setup; *line; line++)
+ PG_CMD_PUTS(*line);
+
+ PG_CMD_CLOSE;
+
+ check_ok();
+}
+
+/*
* copy template1 to template0
*/
static void
@@ -2606,6 +2639,8 @@
vacuum_db();
+ make_default();
+
make_template0();
if (authwarning != NULL)
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [PATCHES] default database creation with initdb
Umm. Tiny item, but your comment still refers to the database as pg_system ;-) //Magnus > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andreas Pflug > Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 10:42 AM > To: PostgreSQL-patches > Subject: [PATCHES] default database creation with initdb > > As per discussion on -hackers the attached patch creates the > 'default' > database at initdb time as a default target for initial > connections to keep template1 free from connections and > available as template source. > > I consider this DB a system object, so it's created before > make_template0 sets the last_system_oid (wondering why > template0 isn't considered a system db too) > > Regards, > Andreas > ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [PATCHES] default database creation with initdb
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Umm. Tiny item, but your comment still refers to the database as
pg_system ;-)
:-)
Regards,
Andreas
Index: src/bin/initdb/initdb.c
===
RCS file: /projects/cvsroot/pgsql/src/bin/initdb/initdb.c,v
retrieving revision 1.83
diff -u -r1.83 initdb.c
--- src/bin/initdb/initdb.c 30 Apr 2005 08:08:51 - 1.83
+++ src/bin/initdb/initdb.c 18 Jun 2005 08:54:07 -
@@ -177,6 +177,7 @@
static void set_info_version(void);
static void setup_schema(void);
static void vacuum_db(void);
+static void make_default(void);
static void make_template0(void);
static void trapsig(int signum);
static void check_ok(void);
@@ -1828,6 +1829,38 @@
}
/*
+ * copy template1 to default
+ */
+static void
+make_default(void)
+{
+ PG_CMD_DECL;
+ char **line;
+ static char *default_setup[] = {
+ "CREATE DATABASE \"default\";\n",
+ "REVOKE CREATE,TEMPORARY ON DATABASE \"default\" FROM
public;\n",
+ NULL
+ };
+
+ fputs(_("copying template1 to default ... "), stdout);
+ fflush(stdout);
+
+ snprintf(cmd, sizeof(cmd),
+"\"%s\" %s template1 >%s",
+backend_exec, backend_options,
+DEVNULL);
+
+ PG_CMD_OPEN;
+
+ for (line = default_setup; *line; line++)
+ PG_CMD_PUTS(*line);
+
+ PG_CMD_CLOSE;
+
+ check_ok();
+}
+
+/*
* copy template1 to template0
*/
static void
@@ -2606,6 +2639,8 @@
vacuum_db();
+ make_default();
+
make_template0();
if (authwarning != NULL)
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [PATCHES] default database creation with initdb
On Saturday 18 June 2005 04:55, Andreas Pflug wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > Umm. Tiny item, but your comment still refers to the database as
> > pg_system ;-)
> >
What is the purpose of this database? A generalized, shared resource for tool
makers and add-on packages to store information in PostgreSQL, or a working
database that is usable (and to be used) out of the box for new users? I
really don't think we want the latter... I can see users connecting via psql
and then playing around with different add/create type statements. It is all
too common a question from newbies... "does postgresql have a default
database to get started with?" They'll see this database and begin creating
schema and using this as thier main database, and I think we ought to avoid
that. If people don't like pg_system, pg_addons seem like a much safer name
to go with imho.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [PATCHES] default database creation with initdb
Andreas Pflug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > + "CREATE DATABASE \"default\";\n", > + "REVOKE CREATE,TEMPORARY ON DATABASE \"default\" FROM > public;\n", Uh, why the rights revocation? That makes the thing essentially useless ... except to superusers, who will not be affected anyway. I don't think this is a sane default. In any case, fixing initdb for this is trivial. I count something north of 160 other references to template1 in the current sources, scattered across 60+ files. Every one of those has to be looked at and possibly changed. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [PATCHES] default database creation with initdb
Robert Treat wrote: On Saturday 18 June 2005 04:55, Andreas Pflug wrote: Magnus Hagander wrote: Umm. Tiny item, but your comment still refers to the database as pg_system ;-) What is the purpose of this database? A generalized, shared resource for tool makers and add-on packages to store information in PostgreSQL, or a working database that is usable (and to be used) out of the box for new users? I really don't think we want the latter... I can see users connecting via psql and then playing around with different add/create type statements. It is all too common a question from newbies... "does postgresql have a default database to get started with?" A sample DB would be nice... They'll see this database and begin creating schema and using this as thier main database, and I think we ought to avoid that. If people don't like pg_system, pg_addons seem like a much safer name to go with imho. To avoid people creating stuff in it, the patch revokes CREATE from public (won't help against admins), which in turn Tom thinks is "not a sane default". Regards, Andreas ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [PATCHES] default database creation with initdb
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 09:27:49 -0400, Robert Treat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Saturday 18 June 2005 04:55, Andreas Pflug wrote: > > Magnus Hagander wrote: > > > Umm. Tiny item, but your comment still refers to the database as > > > pg_system ;-) > > > > > What is the purpose of this database? A generalized, shared resource for tool > makers and add-on packages to store information in PostgreSQL, or a working > database that is usable (and to be used) out of the box for new users? I > really don't think we want the latter... I can see users connecting via psql > and then playing around with different add/create type statements. It is all > too common a question from newbies... "does postgresql have a default > database to get started with?" They'll see this database and begin creating > schema and using this as thier main database, and I think we ought to avoid > that. If people don't like pg_system, pg_addons seem like a much safer name > to go with imho. I believe the intention is that things that need to connect to some database to do their work (e.g. psql -l, createuser) will connect to that database. createdb will still connect to template1, but now will be less likely to have a conflict with another user being connected to template1 at the same time. I didn't check the patch to see if the behavior of the psql -l and createuser were changed or if just the initdb behavior was changed. I don't think it will be a big deal if people put stuff in that database. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
