On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 2:01 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 08:53:49AM +0900, Ryo Kanbayashi wrote:
> > Putting a bit of context here. Most of the Postgres hackers based in
> > Japan had a meeting last Friday, and Kanbayashi-san has asked me about
> > patches that introduce to simpler code paths in the tree that could be
> > worked on for this release. I've mentioned this thread to him.
> >
> > > Just to let you know, my action is not intended to steal your
> > > contribution but to prevent your good idea from being lost.
> >
> > Authors and reviewers get busy because of life and work matters, and
> > contributions are listed in the commit logs for everybody who
> > participates. If you can help move this patch forward, thanks a lot
> > for the help! IMO, that would be great. The patch set still needs
> > more reorganization and adjustments, but I think that we can get it
> > there
Michael,
CC: Torsten
I reviewed the patch and add some modification described below.
part of https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/Zz2AE7NKKLIZTtEh%40paquier.xyz
> +# This tests "service" and "servicefile"
>
> You are introducing tests for the existing "service", as well as tests
> for the new "servicefile". Could it be possible to split that into
> two patches for clarity? You'd want one to provide coverage for the
> existing features (PGSERVICEFILE, PGSERVICE and connection parameter
> "service"), then add tests for the new feature "servicename" with its
> libpq implementation. That would make your main patch simpler, as
> well.
>
> +open my $fh, '>', $srvfile or die $!;
> +print $fh "[my_srv]\n";
> +print $fh +($node->connstr =~ s/ /\n/gr), "\n";
> +close $fh;
>
> Sure that's OK on Windows where we have CRLFs, not just LFs?
I did...
* Split the patch to two patches
1) regression test of existing features.
2) adding servicefile option feature, its regression test and etc
* Add codes which care new line code of Windows
* Add comments and apply formatter :)
---
Great Regards,
Ryo Kanbayashi
