Hello Robins,
Thanks Fabien. This was a wrong attachment to the email.
This patch works for me (applied, tested).
However, some remarks:
seq4: should it check something? How do you know that OWNED BY did
anything?
regress_role_seq2: shoult check that the sequence owner is the table
owne
On 9 July 2013 08:41, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> I do not see any difference between both "regress_sequence_v[45].patch"**.
> I guess you sent the earlier version.
>
Thanks Fabien. This was a wrong attachment to the email.
Please find attached the updated patch (I've renamed v5 as v6 for clarity).
Please find updated patch:
- 'make check' successful with recent changes
- Renamed ROLEs as per feedback
Sorry, I took the wrong thread.
I do not see any difference between both "regress_sequence_v[45].patch".
I guess you sent the earlier version.
--
Fabien.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers maili
On 3 July 2013 10:13, Robert Haas wrote:
> I think you should rename the roles used here to regress_rol_seq1 etc.
> to match the CREATE OPERATOR patch.
>
Please find updated patch:
- 'make check' successful with recent changes
- Renamed ROLEs as per feedback
--
Robins Tharakan
regress_sequenc
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 6:40 PM, Robins Tharakan wrote:
> Have provided an updated patch as per Fabien's recent response on Commitfest
> site.
> Any and all feedback is appreciated.
I think you should rename the roles used here to regress_rol_seq1 etc.
to match the CREATE OPERATOR patch.
And you
On 06/28/2013 02:15 PM, Robins Tharakan wrote:
> Seems like thats because of a recent (15th May 2013) patch
> (b14206862278347a379f2bb72d92d16fb9dcea45) that changed the error message
> that is printed. Its just one line of difference actually.
>
> Let me know if this is otherwise good to go.
> I'
On 06/28/2013 02:15 PM, Robins Tharakan wrote:
> Seems like thats because of a recent (15th May 2013) patch
> (b14206862278347a379f2bb72d92d16fb9dcea45) that changed the error message
> that is printed. Its just one line of difference actually.
>
> Let me know if this is otherwise good to go.
> I'
Seems like thats because of a recent (15th May 2013) patch
(b14206862278347a379f2bb72d92d16fb9dcea45) that changed the error message
that is printed. Its just one line of difference actually.
Let me know if this is otherwise good to go.
I'll checkout the latest revision and submit this patch again
On 05/07/2013 03:40 PM, Robins Tharakan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Have provided an updated patch as per Fabien's recent response on
> Commitfest site.
> Any and all feedback is appreciated.
The updated patch is giving a FAILURE for me:
parallel group (19 tests): limit temp plancache conversion rowtypes
Have provided an updated patch as per Fabien's recent response on
Commitfest site. Any and all feedback is appreciated.
Review:
This patch works for me.
It adds valuable sequence test cases, especially trying corner cases with
expected errors and permission denials.
I suggest to accept it
Hi,
Have provided an updated patch as per Fabien's recent response on
Commitfest site.
Any and all feedback is appreciated.
--
Robins Tharakan
regress_sequence_v4.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subsc
Duh. Apologies. That's what happens when you make that 1 last change.
Please find an updated patch.
--
Robins Tharakan
On 19 March 2013 04:07, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Robins Tharakan
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Please find an updated patch (reworked on the nam
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Robins Tharakan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please find an updated patch (reworked on the names of SEQUENCES / ROLES /
> SCHEMA etc.)
> Takes code-coverage of 'make check' for SEQUENCE to ~95%.
There is a typo difference between sequence.out and sequence.sql
causing the test
Hi,
Please find an updated patch (reworked on the names of SEQUENCES / ROLES /
SCHEMA etc.)
Takes code-coverage of 'make check' for SEQUENCE to ~95%.
--
Robins Tharakan
On 16 March 2013 02:03, robins wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've added some regression tests for SEQUENCE. A cumulative patch is
> attac
Hi,
I've added some regression tests for SEQUENCE. A cumulative patch is
attached.
Barring a (still to decipher) function seq_redo() and trying to learn how
to actually test it, this takes care of most branches of (
src/backend/commands/sequence.c) taking code-coverage (of 'make check') to
~95%.
Thanks Laurenz.
Would correct these (and readup) before submitting next patch.
--
Robins
Tharakan
On 13 March 2013 13:49, Albe Laurenz wrote:
> robins wrote:
> > Attached is a small patch to test corner cases related to Sequences
> (basically aimed at increasing
> > code-coverage of sequence.
robins wrote:
> Attached is a small patch to test corner cases related to Sequences
> (basically aimed at increasing
> code-coverage of sequence.sql in regression tests).
>
> Look forward to any and all feedback.
Looks ok except that the patch is backwards
(all added lines start with "-"). I fo
Hi,
Attached is a small patch to test corner cases related to Sequences
(basically aimed at increasing code-coverage of sequence.sql in regression
tests).
Look forward to any and all feedback.
--
Robins
Tharakan
commit-sequence.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing
18 matches
Mail list logo
