Re: [HACKERS] Open Item: pg_controldata - machine readable?

2010-05-31 Thread Greg Smith

Takahiro Itagaki wrote:

The proposal by Joe Conway is adding a new contib module.
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4b959d7a.6010...@joeconway.com
http://github.com/jconway/pg_controldata
  


There's a second one of these floating around now too:  
http://labs.omniti.com/trac/pgtreats/browser/trunk/contrib/control


--
Greg Smith  2ndQuadrant US  Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
g...@2ndquadrant.com   www.2ndQuadrant.us


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


[HACKERS] Open Item: pg_controldata - machine readable?

2010-05-25 Thread Takahiro Itagaki
There is an open item pg_controldata - machine readable? in the list:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.0_Open_Items

The proposal by Joe Conway is adding a new contib module.
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4b959d7a.6010...@joeconway.com
http://github.com/jconway/pg_controldata

Should we add the module to 9.0? If we do so, SGML documentation is required.

IMHO, I'd like to put the feature into the core instead of a contrib
module, but we cannot change the catalog version in this time.
So, how about providing control file information through pg_settings
view? We will retrieve those variables as GUC options.

Regards,
---
Takahiro Itagaki
NTT Open Source Software Center


-- 
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] Open Item: pg_controldata - machine readable?

2010-05-25 Thread Tom Lane
Takahiro Itagaki itagaki.takah...@oss.ntt.co.jp writes:
 There is an open item pg_controldata - machine readable? in the list:
 http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.0_Open_Items

 The proposal by Joe Conway is adding a new contib module.
 http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4b959d7a.6010...@joeconway.com
 http://github.com/jconway/pg_controldata

 Should we add the module to 9.0?

No.  This is a new feature that wasn't even under consideration,
let alone written, at the time of 9.0 feature freeze.  It does not
get into either core or contrib this time around.

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] Open Item: pg_controldata - machine readable?

2010-05-25 Thread Joe Conway
On 05/25/2010 08:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
 Takahiro Itagaki itagaki.takah...@oss.ntt.co.jp writes:
 There is an open item pg_controldata - machine readable? in the list:
 http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.0_Open_Items
 
 The proposal by Joe Conway is adding a new contib module.
 http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4b959d7a.6010...@joeconway.com
 http://github.com/jconway/pg_controldata
 
 Should we add the module to 9.0?
 
 No.  This is a new feature that wasn't even under consideration,
 let alone written, at the time of 9.0 feature freeze.  It does not
 get into either core or contrib this time around.

Yup, agreed. That was why I put it on github instead of sending a patch
to the list. It was also a quick and dirty hack -- maybe it could be
cleaned up for 9.1, but I'm not sure there was consensus that it was
really needed.

Joe




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [HACKERS] Open Item: pg_controldata - machine readable?

2010-05-25 Thread Takahiro Itagaki

Joe Conway m...@joeconway.com wrote:

  There is an open item pg_controldata - machine readable? in the list:
  http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.0_Open_Items
  Should we add the module to 9.0?
  
  No.  This is a new feature that wasn't even under consideration,
  let alone written, at the time of 9.0 feature freeze.  It does not
  get into either core or contrib this time around.
 
 Yup, agreed. That was why I put it on github instead of sending a patch
 to the list. It was also a quick and dirty hack -- maybe it could be
 cleaned up for 9.1, but I'm not sure there was consensus that it was
 really needed.

OK, I moved it from 9.0 open items to new features for 9.1.

Regards,
---
Takahiro Itagaki
NTT Open Source Software Center



-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers