On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2015-09-20 16:38:58 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> Michael: Why did you exclude test_extensions in Mkvcbuild.pm?
test_extensions contains nothing that should be compiled, only things
that should be installed.
--
Michael
--
Sent via pgsq
On 2015-10-03 17:56:07 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 2015-10-03 17:16, Andres Freund wrote:
> >On 2015-10-03 17:15:54 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> >>Here's an updated patch. Petr, could you please expand the test to
> >>handle a bit more complex cascading setups?
> >
>
> Okay, I changed the tes
On 2015-10-03 17:16, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-10-03 17:15:54 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
Here's an updated patch. Petr, could you please expand the test to
handle a bit more complex cascading setups?
Okay, I changed the test to make the dependencies bit more complex -
more than one depe
On 2015-10-03 17:15:54 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> Here's an updated patch. Petr, could you please expand the test to
> handle a bit more complex cascading setups?
...
>From fa11dc75500eb91b68baeeb07a00a789ed0050b3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Andres Freund
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:01:32 +020
On 2015-09-20 16:38:58 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> Here it is.
I went over the patch, trying to commit it. Changed a bunch of stylistic
issues (comments, NOTICE location, ...) . But also found a bug: Namely
cascade_parent was set wrongly in a bunch of situations: When an
extension has multiple de
On 2015-09-18 04:52, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 2015-09-17 17:31, Jeff Janes wrote:
If I fail to specify CASCADE and get an ERROR, I think there should be a
HINT which suggests the use of CASCADE.
create extension earthdistance ;
ERROR: required extension "cube" is not installed
(no hint)
Ther
On Sep 17, 2015 7:52 PM, "Petr Jelinek" wrote:
>
> On 2015-09-17 17:31, Jeff Janes wrote:
>>
>>
>> Also, It would be nice to have psql tab complete the word CASCADE.
>>
>
> Hmm, it already does?
Indeed it does. Oops. I need to run the program I just compiled, and not
some other version that hap
On 2015-09-17 17:31, Jeff Janes wrote:
If I fail to specify CASCADE and get an ERROR, I think there should be a
HINT which suggests the use of CASCADE.
create extension earthdistance ;
ERROR: required extension "cube" is not installed
(no hint)
There is a HINT on the reverse operation:
drop
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 2015-09-08 04:06, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Michael Paquier
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Attached are as well changes for the documentation that I spotted in
>>> earlier reviews but were not included in the last
On 2015-09-16 19:46:10 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Andres Freund wrote:
>
> > > @@ -91,8 +92,38 @@ CREATE EXTENSION [ IF NOT EXISTS ] > > class="parameter">extension_name
> > > The name of the schema in which to install the extension's
> > > objects, given that the extension
Andres Freund wrote:
> > @@ -91,8 +92,38 @@ CREATE EXTENSION [ IF NOT EXISTS ] > class="parameter">extension_name
> > The name of the schema in which to install the extension's
> > objects, given that the extension allows its contents to be
> > relocated. The named sch
On 2015-09-16 05:44:22 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 2015-09-08 04:06, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Michael Paquier
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>Attached are as well changes for the documentation that I spotted in
> >>earlier reviews but were not included in the last version
On 2015-09-08 04:06, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
Attached are as well changes for the documentation that I spotted in
earlier reviews but were not included in the last version sent by Petr
yesterday. Feel free to discard them if you think they
On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 6:14 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>> Attached patch uses just boolean in cascade DefElem and splits the
>> CreateExtension into two functions, the cascade code now calls the
>> CreateExtensionInternal. One thing though - I
On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 6:14 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> Attached patch uses just boolean in cascade DefElem and splits the
> CreateExtension into two functions, the cascade code now calls the
> CreateExtensionInternal. One thing though - I am passing the DefElems
> directly to the cascaded CreateExte
On 2015-09-07 21:28, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 2015-09-07 21:09, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-09-07 20:56:50 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote:
Yes that sounds cleaner. Just as a side note, List is a Node and
does have
copy support (and we pass List as DefElem->arg from gram.y in se
On 2015-09-07 21:09, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-09-07 20:56:50 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote:
Yes that sounds cleaner. Just as a side note, List is a Node and does have
copy support (and we pass List as DefElem->arg from gram.y in several
places).
I know - but the list ele
On 2015-09-07 16:09:27 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2015-09-07 20:56:50 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> > > Yes that sounds cleaner. Just as a side note, List is a Node and does have
> > > copy support (and we pass List as DefElem->arg from gram.y in several
> > > places)
Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2015-09-07 20:56:50 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> > Yes that sounds cleaner. Just as a side note, List is a Node and does have
> > copy support (and we pass List as DefElem->arg from gram.y in several
> > places).
>
> I know - but the list element in this case don't have c
On 2015-09-07 20:56:50 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> Yes that sounds cleaner. Just as a side note, List is a Node and does have
> copy support (and we pass List as DefElem->arg from gram.y in several
> places).
I know - but the list element in this case don't have copy support, no?
You seem to have
On 2015-09-02 17:31, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-09-02 17:27:38 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
1) Passing the list of parents through the cascade DefElem strikes me as
incredibly ugly.
For one the cascade option really should take a true/false type option
on the C level (so you can do defGetBoole
On 2015-09-02 17:27:38 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> 1) Passing the list of parents through the cascade DefElem strikes me as
> incredibly ugly.
>
> For one the cascade option really should take a true/false type option
> on the C level (so you can do defGetBoolean()), for another passing
> throug
Hi,
I'm looking at committing this patch. I found some nitpick-level things
that I can easily fixup. But I dislike two things:
1) Passing the list of parents through the cascade DefElem strikes me as
incredibly ugly.
For one the cascade option really should take a true/false type option
on the C
On 2015-07-31 03:03, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 2015-07-27 15:18, Michael Paquier wrote:
Something also has not been discussed yet: what to do with new_version
and old_version (the options of CreateExtensionStmt)? As of now if
those options a
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 2015-07-27 15:18, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Something also has not been discussed yet: what to do with new_version
>> and old_version (the options of CreateExtensionStmt)? As of now if
>> those options are defined they are not passed down t
On 2015-07-27 15:18, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 1:01 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
Yes that's what I meant by the change of checking order in the explanation
above. I did that because I thought code would be more complicated
otherwise, but apparently I was stupid...
+In c
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 1:01 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> Yes that's what I meant by the change of checking order in the explanation
> above. I did that because I thought code would be more complicated
> otherwise, but apparently I was stupid...
+In case the extension specifies schema in its
On 2015-07-25 14:37, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 2015-07-22 07:12, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Petr Jelinek writes:
... My main question is if we are
ok with SCHEMA having different behavior
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 2015-07-22 07:12, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>
>>> Petr Jelinek writes:
... My main question is if we are
ok with SCHEMA having different behavior with CASCADE vs witho
On 2015-07-22 07:12, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Petr Jelinek writes:
... My main question is if we are
ok with SCHEMA having different behavior with CASCADE vs without
CASCADE. I went originally with "no" and added the DEFAULT flag to
SCHEMA. If t
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Petr Jelinek writes:
>> ... My main question is if we are
>> ok with SCHEMA having different behavior with CASCADE vs without
>> CASCADE. I went originally with "no" and added the DEFAULT flag to
>> SCHEMA. If the answer is "yes" then we don't n
Petr Jelinek writes:
> ... My main question is if we are
> ok with SCHEMA having different behavior with CASCADE vs without
> CASCADE. I went originally with "no" and added the DEFAULT flag to
> SCHEMA. If the answer is "yes" then we don't need the flag (in that case
> CASCADE acts as the flag
On 2015-07-21 15:48, Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Haas writes:
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 10:29 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:>
In short I would give up on the DEFAULT SCHEMA business, and
add a new flag in the control file to decide if a given extension
passes down the schema name of its child when creat
Robert Haas writes:
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 10:29 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:>
>> In short I would give up on the DEFAULT SCHEMA business, and
>> add a new flag in the control file to decide if a given extension
>> passes down the schema name of its child when created in cascade,
>> default be
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 10:29 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:> In > short I would give up on the
DEFAULT SCHEMA business, and
> add a new flag in the control file to decide if a given extension
> passes down the schema name of its child when created in cascade,
> default being true for the potential is
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 10:20 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 2015-07-19 17:16, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Petr Jelinek
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2015-07-15 06:07, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>
>
On 2015-07-19 17:16, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 2015-07-15 06:07, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund writes:
On July 10, 2015 4:16:59 PM GMT+02:00, Tom Lane
wrote:
Would that propa
On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 2015-07-15 06:07, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>
>>> Andres Freund writes:
On July 10, 2015 4:16:59 PM GMT+02:00, Tom Lane
wrote:
>
> Would that propagate down th
On 2015-07-15 06:07, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund writes:
On July 10, 2015 4:16:59 PM GMT+02:00, Tom Lane wrote:
Would that propagate down through multiple levels of CASCADE? (Although
I'm not sure it would be sensible for a non-rel
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
>> On July 10, 2015 4:16:59 PM GMT+02:00, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Would that propagate down through multiple levels of CASCADE? (Although
>>> I'm not sure it would be sensible for a non-relocatable extension to
>>> depend on
On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 10:14:49AM -0700, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Jul 7, 2015, at 6:41 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> > At the minimum I'd like to see that CREATE EXTENSION foo; would
> > install install extension 'bar' if foo dependended on 'bar' if
> > CASCADE is specified. Right now we alwa
Andres Freund writes:
> On July 10, 2015 4:16:59 PM GMT+02:00, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Would that propagate down through multiple levels of CASCADE? (Although
>> I'm not sure it would be sensible for a non-relocatable extension to
>> depend on a relocatable one, so maybe the need doesn't arise in
>>
On July 10, 2015 4:16:59 PM GMT+02:00, Tom Lane wrote:
>Andres Freund writes:
>> I think we should copy the SCHEMA option here and document that we
>use
>> the same schema. But it needs to be done in a way that doesn't error
>out
>> if the extension is not relocatable...
>
>Would that propagate d
Andres Freund writes:
> I think we should copy the SCHEMA option here and document that we use
> the same schema. But it needs to be done in a way that doesn't error out
> if the extension is not relocatable...
Would that propagate down through multiple levels of CASCADE? (Although
I'm not sure
On 2015-06-15 00:50:08 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> + /* Create and execute new CREATE EXTENSION
> statement. */
> + ces = makeNode(CreateExtensionStmt);
> + ces->extname = curreq;
> + c
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
>> This seems quite reasonable, but I have to ask: How many extensions are
>> there out there that depend on another extension? Off the top of my head, I
>> can't think of any..
> With transforms there are such depend
> 10 июля 2015 г., в 16:09, Heikki Linnakangas написал(а):
>
> On 07/09/2015 07:05 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>> On 2015-07-07 15:41, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> On 2015-07-07 22:36:29 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:50 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am gett
On 2015-07-10 16:09:48 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> This seems quite reasonable, but I have to ask: How many extensions are
> there out there that depend on another extension? Off the top of my head, I
> can't think of any..
BDR/UDR is one (or two depending on your POV).
I think a part of w
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> On 07/09/2015 07:05 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>
>> On 2015-07-07 15:41, Andres Freund wrote:
>>
>>> On 2015-07-07 22:36:29 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>>
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:50 AM, Petr Jelinek
wrote:
> Hi,
>
On 07/09/2015 07:05 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
On 2015-07-07 15:41, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-07-07 22:36:29 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:50 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
Hi,
I am getting tired installing manually required extensions manually. I was
wondering if we might wan
On 2015-07-07 15:41, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2015-07-07 22:36:29 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:50 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
Hi,
I am getting tired installing manually required extensions manually. I was
wondering if we might want to add option to CREATE SEQUENCE that would
On Jul 7, 2015, at 6:41 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> At the minimum I'd like to see that CREATE EXTENSION foo; would install
> install extension 'bar' if foo dependended on 'bar' if CASCADE is
> specified. Right now we always error out saying that the dependency on
> 'bar' is not fullfilled - not p
On 2015-07-07 22:36:29 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:50 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am getting tired installing manually required extensions manually. I was
> > wondering if we might want to add option to CREATE SEQUENCE that would allow
> > automatic creation
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:50 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am getting tired installing manually required extensions manually. I was
> wondering if we might want to add option to CREATE SEQUENCE that would allow
> automatic creation of the extensions required by the extension that is being
>
On 06/15/2015 12:50 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am getting tired installing manually required extensions manually. I
> was wondering if we might want to add option to CREATE SEQUENCE that
> would allow automatic creation of the extensions required by the
> extension that is being installed
+1
Is it working in runtime too?
Dne 15.6.2015 0:51 napsal uživatel "Petr Jelinek" :
> Hi,
>
> I am getting tired installing manually required extensions manually. I was
> wondering if we might want to add option to CREATE SEQUENCE that would
> allow automatic creation of the extensions required
56 matches
Mail list logo
