Thread: What we still have to do for 1.12

Hi,

As Bruce wrote the release notes for 9.0, I read it to check if we still
have a lot of things to do to fully support 9.0. We're not that far but
we still have two major missing features.

Here is the list of the work *I think* we still have to do before a 1.12
beta 1 release:

 * Support for 9.0:
   * exclusion constraint (#118)
   * default ACL (#99)
   * deferrable unique constraint
   * typed table (#135) ...     patch available, awaiting comments
   * autonamed index (#158) ... patch available, awaiting comments

 * Support for 8.4:
   * sql/med objects (#142)

 * To be fixed:
   * frmQuery connection combobox layout
   * frmOptions dialog layout

I tried many times to include the exclusion constraint support and the
default ACL support, but couldn't get anything done. I also tried to
work on the sql/med objects, but that too didn't work out. Maybe I'm
just tired :/

I think I'm gonna work on the to-be-fixed issues and on the remaining
bugs. I'll also apply the patches awaiting comments monday evening if
no-one objects to it.

I don't know when we want to release beta 1. If we want that before 9.0
beta 1 or really next to it, I'm gonna ask for help :)


--
Guillaume.
 http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 http://dalibo.com

On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As Bruce wrote the release notes for 9.0, I read it to check if we still
> have a lot of things to do to fully support 9.0. We're not that far but
> we still have two major missing features.
>
> Here is the list of the work *I think* we still have to do before a 1.12
> beta 1 release:
>
>  * Support for 9.0:
>   * exclusion constraint (#118)
>   * default ACL (#99)
>   * deferrable unique constraint
>   * typed table (#135) ...     patch available, awaiting comments
>   * autonamed index (#158) ... patch available, awaiting comments

We also have an internal TODO item to update support for synonyms in
EDB, which have changed. Ashesh - any idea how long that might take?
It's ticket number FB9247.

>  * Support for 8.4:
>   * sql/med objects (#142)

Why? They don't do anything useful yet do they?

>  * To be fixed:
>   * frmQuery connection combobox layout
>   * frmOptions dialog layout

I was looking at the backup/restore dialogues the other day. I think
we should put the tabs back up at the top agin, as they look awful at
the bottom on the Mac. Thoughts?

> I tried many times to include the exclusion constraint support and the
> default ACL support, but couldn't get anything done. I also tried to
> work on the sql/med objects, but that too didn't work out. Maybe I'm
> just tired :/

Yeah, I know that feeling.

> I think I'm gonna work on the to-be-fixed issues and on the remaining
> bugs. I'll also apply the patches awaiting comments monday evening if
> no-one objects to it.

Go ahead.

> I don't know when we want to release beta 1. If we want that before 9.0
> beta 1 or really next to it, I'm gonna ask for help :)

We can probably push out an alpha for PG beta 1. We always get bags of
time once PG goes to beta.


--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
PG East Conference: http://www.enterprisedb.com/community/nav-pg-east-2010.do

Hi Ashesh,

Le 24/03/2010 14:48, Ashesh Vashi a écrit :
> [...]
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 10:19 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
> <guillaume@lelarge.info>wrote:
>> [...]
>> As Bruce wrote the release notes for 9.0, I read it to check if we still
>> have a lot of things to do to fully support 9.0. We're not that far but
>> we still have two major missing features.
>>
>> Here is the list of the work *I think* we still have to do before a 1.12
>> beta 1 release:
>>
>>  * Support for 9.0:
>>   * exclusion constraint (#118)
>>   * default ACL (#99)
>>   * deferrable unique constraint
>>   * typed table (#135) ...     patch available, awaiting comments
>>   * autonamed index (#158) ... patch available, awaiting comments
>>
>
> Is there any way, I can help you on this?
>

Thanks, I would love to. #135 and #158 are already commited. I sent the
patch for frmOptions yesterday. So you can grab anything of the rest of
the list.

Here is what I did on the other tickets

* Ticket 118: exclusion constraint
  See ticket118_NOTCOMPLETE.patch.
  IIRC, I copied the dlgIndex and pgIndex to make it easy building the
  dlgExclude. But it didn't work out that great.

* Ticket 99: default ACL
  See ticket99_NOTCOMPLETE.patch.
  My idea was to create a copy of dlgSecurityProperty named
  dlgDefaultSecurityProperty. It kind of works. This new tab is
  available on the database, but I have issues with it and the old
  security one.

* Ticket 142: SQL/Med objects
  See ticket142_NOTCOMPLETE.patch.
  The Foreign Data Wrapper object is already available. I wanted to
  have the Foreign Server object as a child of the first one, but all
  I'm able to have is a big crash. If you're able to fix this crash, I
  think I'll be able to handle the rest of the patch. But this crash
  stopped me.
  BTW, to anwser Dave's question, dblink can make use of SQL/Med
  objects (but AFAIK, it's the only one... which is too bad).

So, the easier one should be ticket 142. It would help me to continue on
this patch. The more important one, as Dave already noticed are
exclusion constraint and default ACL.

BTW, I'm not sure you should start from my patches. I sent them if it
can help you, but I probably was wrong from the beginning of my patches
(for example, copying dlgIndex instead of dlgCheck could be a serious
mistake).

Thanks for your help, I really appreciate.


--
Guillaume.
 http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 http://dalibo.com

Le 25/03/2010 10:34, Ashesh Vashi a écrit :
> Hi Guillaume,
>
> * Ticket 99: default ACL
>>  See ticket99_NOTCOMPLETE.patch.
>>  My idea was to create a copy of dlgSecurityProperty named
>>  dlgDefaultSecurityProperty. It kind of works. This new tab is
>>  available on the database, but I have issues with it and the old
>>  security one.
>>
>
> I think - you forgot to add two file in the patch:
> - include/ctl/ctlDefaultSecurityPanel.h
> - ctl/ctlDefaultSecurityPanel.cpp
>
> Can you please share them with me?
>

They should be in the patch. I don't understand why they aren't.
Anyways, they are attached.

Thanks.


--
Guillaume.
 http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 http://dalibo.com