Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] use of pager on Windows psql

2008-05-17 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Bruce Momjian wrote: Andrew Dunstan wrote: Not sure why ware are not. Should we enabled that code on Win32 and see how it works? Can you test it? Was it some MinGW limitation? I do see isatty() being used on lots of platforms. This is kind of odd. Ah, I bet it came from libpq's PQprint

Re: [PATCHES] lc_time and localized dates

2008-05-17 Thread Euler Taveira de Oliveira
Bruce Momjian wrote: I have reviewed this patch. I like the method you used, but I did find a few things I had to change. Good catch. I tested here and it seems ok. Thanks for your review. -- Euler Taveira de Oliveira http://www.timbira.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (pgsq

Re: [PATCHES] lc_time and localized dates

2008-05-17 Thread Bruce Momjian
I have reviewed this patch. I like the method you used, but I did find a few things I had to change. First, I found the abbreviated variable names confusing so I used longer ones, like: extern char *localized_abbrev_days[7]; extern char *localized_full_days[7];

Re: [PATCHES] pg_dump lock timeout - resend

2008-05-17 Thread Euler Taveira de Oliveira
Joshua D. Drake wrote: The pages could certainly stand an updating to reflect how development currently commences. I will work up a patch next week. IMHO, this development information needs to be at [1]. [1] http://www.postgresql.org/developer/roadmap -- Euler Taveira de Oliveira http:

Re: [PATCHES] pg_dump lock timeout - resend

2008-05-17 Thread Joshua D. Drake
daveg wrote: On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 06:55:27PM -0300, Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote: daveg wrote: I originally sent this a week ago, but there was no response and I do not see it Nope. FYI, the right link is [1] and your patch [2] is in the queue for July Commit Fest. [1] http://wiki.po

Re: [PATCHES] pg_dump lock timeout - resend

2008-05-17 Thread daveg
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 06:55:27PM -0300, Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote: > daveg wrote: > > >I originally sent this a week ago, but there was no response and I do not > >see it > > > Nope. FYI, the right link is [1] and your patch [2] is in the queue for > July Commit Fest. > > [1] http://wiki

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] use of pager on Windows psql

2008-05-17 Thread Bruce Momjian
Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > Not sure why ware are not. Should we enabled that code on Win32 and see > > how it works? Can you test it? Was it some MinGW limitation? I do see > > isatty() being used on lots of platforms. > > > > This is kind of odd. Ah, I bet it came from libpq's PQprint(), which

Re: [PATCHES] psql command aliases support

2008-05-17 Thread Tom Lane
Bernd Helmle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > please find attached a patch which implements psql command aliases. They > work the same way as on bash, zsh and others, for example: I'm still not convinced that we want this sort of feature at all. I quote from the current bash manual page: ALIASES

Re: [PATCHES] pg_dump lock timeout - resend

2008-05-17 Thread Euler Taveira de Oliveira
daveg wrote: I originally sent this a week ago, but there was no response and I do not see it Nope. FYI, the right link is [1] and your patch [2] is in the queue for July Commit Fest. [1] http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Development_information [2] http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/CommitFest:J

Re: [PATCHES] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Don't call rm with empty file list.

2008-05-17 Thread Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Log Message: > --- > Don't call rm with empty file list. > > Modified Files: > -- > pgsql/src: > nls-global.mk (r1.12 -> r1.13) > > (http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/nls-global.mk?r1=1.12&r2=1.13) FYI, I had to a

[PATCHES] pg_dump lock timeout - resend

2008-05-17 Thread daveg
I originally sent this a week ago, but there was no response and I do not see it at: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches or http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold so I assume it got missed in all the excitement about the psql banner. - Subject: [PATCHES] pg_dump

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] TRUNCATE TABLE with IDENTITY

2008-05-17 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sat, 2008-05-17 at 12:04 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > So what I think we should do is leave the patch there, revise the > warning per Neil's complaint, and add a TODO item to reimplement > RESTART IDENTITY transactionally. Sounds good. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL T

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] TRUNCATE TABLE with IDENTITY

2008-05-17 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 21:50 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Actually, I agree. Shall we just revert that feature? > Perhaps, but we should also take into account that TRUNCATE is not and > never will be MVCC compliant, so its not something you'd expect to run >

Re: [PATCHES] libpq object hooks (libpq events)

2008-05-17 Thread Andrew Chernow
Here is an updated patch for what was called object hooks. This is now called libpq events. If someone has a better name or hates ours, let us know. I am continuing to use the object hooks thread to avoid confusing anyone. Terminology: I got rid of calling it object events because it is poss

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] TRUNCATE TABLE with IDENTITY

2008-05-17 Thread Simon Riggs
On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 21:50 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Ugh. The fact that the RESTART IDENTITY part of TRUNCATE is > > non-transactional is a pretty unsightly wort. > > Actually, I agree. Shall we just revert that feature? The ALTER > SEQUENCE part of t