Re: [HACKERS] ecpg localization
Tom Lane wrote: I'm wondering whether it would be appropriate to apply now despite being incomplete. The patch touches enough places in ecpg that code drift is likely to be a serious problem if it has to sit around for long. We could do that, as soon as the author understands where the patch would need to go, as discussed elsewhere in this thread. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] ecpg localization
Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote: I don't know if I understand what you want to say by call gettext. A quick look at the l10n of backend proves that it calls gettext everywhere. Could you ellaborate? In nls.mk, you mark mmerror as containing arguments for translation, but mmerror doesn't call gettext anywhere, so nothing would get translated at run time. To pick up your backend example, we mark arguments of errmsg() for translation, but then errmsg() calls gettext. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
[HACKERS] statement timeout vs dump/restore
I'm a bit confused about where the consensus is on this issue ( http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/[EMAIL PROTECTED] et al) Do we want the following: 1. pg_dump issues set statement_timeout = 0; to the database prior to taking its copy of data (yes/no/default-but-switchable) 2. pg_dump/pg_restore issue set statement_timeout = 0; in text mode output (yes/no/default-but-switchable) 3. pg_restore issues set statement_timeout = 0; to the database in restore mode (yes/no/default-but-switchable) I would tend to say default-but-switchable for all 3, but maybe that's too complicated. cheers andrew -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] statement timeout vs dump/restore
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do we want the following: 1. pg_dump issues set statement_timeout = 0; to the database prior to taking its copy of data (yes/no/default-but-switchable) 2. pg_dump/pg_restore issue set statement_timeout = 0; in text mode output (yes/no/default-but-switchable) 3. pg_restore issues set statement_timeout = 0; to the database in restore mode (yes/no/default-but-switchable) I think yes for all three. There was some handwaving about someone maybe not wanting it, but an utter lack of convincing use-cases; so I see no point in going to the effort of providing a switch. Note that 2 and 3 are actually the same thing (if you think they are not, then you are putting the behavior in the wrong place). regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] statement timeout vs dump/restore
Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do we want the following: 1. pg_dump issues set statement_timeout = 0; to the database prior to taking its copy of data (yes/no/default-but-switchable) 2. pg_dump/pg_restore issue set statement_timeout = 0; in text mode output (yes/no/default-but-switchable) 3. pg_restore issues set statement_timeout = 0; to the database in restore mode (yes/no/default-but-switchable) I think yes for all three. There was some handwaving about someone maybe not wanting it, but an utter lack of convincing use-cases; so I see no point in going to the effort of providing a switch. Note that 2 and 3 are actually the same thing (if you think they are not, then you are putting the behavior in the wrong place). Right, pg_restore just using the output from pg_dump. The dump has the statement_timeout. That way it works regardless of output (e.g; for psql text based restores). Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout
Joshua D. Drake wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:46:23 -0700 Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And the -c version :) (thanks bruce) Committed with slight editorializing. Statement timeout was only introduced in 7.3, whereas pg_dump can dump from much older versions of Postgres. Also, the indentation needed fixing. wiki updated. cheers andrew -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Committed with slight editorializing. Statement timeout was only introduced in 7.3, whereas pg_dump can dump from much older versions of Postgres. You forget a ; in this committ [1]. [1] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2008-05/msg00028.php -- Euler Taveira de Oliveira http://www.timbira.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers