Thread: pgsql: Add missing_ok option to the SQL functions for reading files.
Add missing_ok option to the SQL functions for reading files. This makes it possible to use the functions without getting errors, if there is a chance that the file might be removed or renamed concurrently. pg_rewind needs to do just that, although this could be useful for other purposes too. (The changes to pg_rewind to use these functions will come in a separate commit.) The read_binary_file() function isn't very well-suited for extensions.c's purposes anymore, if it ever was. So bite the bullet and make a copy of it in extension.c, tailored for that use case. This seems better than the accidental code reuse, even if it's a some more lines of code. Michael Paquier, with plenty of kibitzing by me. Branch ------ master Details ------- http://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/cb2acb1081e13b4b27a76c6b5311115528e49c59 Modified Files -------------- doc/src/sgml/func.sgml | 42 +++++-- src/backend/commands/extension.c | 69 ++++++++--- src/backend/utils/adt/genfile.c | 237 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- src/include/catalog/catversion.h | 2 +- src/include/catalog/pg_proc.h | 16 ++- src/include/utils/builtins.h | 6 +- 6 files changed, 272 insertions(+), 100 deletions(-)
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 3:39 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@iki.fi> wrote: > Add missing_ok option to the SQL functions for reading files. > > This makes it possible to use the functions without getting errors, if there > is a chance that the file might be removed or renamed concurrently. > pg_rewind needs to do just that, although this could be useful for other > purposes too. (The changes to pg_rewind to use these functions will come in > a separate commit.) > > The read_binary_file() function isn't very well-suited for extensions.c's > purposes anymore, if it ever was. So bite the bullet and make a copy of it > in extension.c, tailored for that use case. This seems better than the > accidental code reuse, even if it's a some more lines of code. This has been done done as the part of a fix for the issues with pg_rewind, but perhaps it should be mentioned in the release notes? -- Michael
On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 08:44:41PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 3:39 AM, Heikki Linnakangas > <heikki.linnakangas@iki.fi> wrote: > > Add missing_ok option to the SQL functions for reading files. > > > > This makes it possible to use the functions without getting errors, if there > > is a chance that the file might be removed or renamed concurrently. > > pg_rewind needs to do just that, although this could be useful for other > > purposes too. (The changes to pg_rewind to use these functions will come in > > a separate commit.) > > > > The read_binary_file() function isn't very well-suited for extensions.c's > > purposes anymore, if it ever was. So bite the bullet and make a copy of it > > in extension.c, tailored for that use case. This seems better than the > > accidental code reuse, even if it's a some more lines of code. > > This has been done done as the part of a fix for the issues with > pg_rewind, but perhaps it should be mentioned in the release notes? Yes, I will pick up that change during the creation of the 9.6 release notes. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. +
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 9:39 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 08:44:41PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 3:39 AM, Heikki Linnakangas >> <heikki.linnakangas@iki.fi> wrote: >> > Add missing_ok option to the SQL functions for reading files. >> > >> > This makes it possible to use the functions without getting errors, if there >> > is a chance that the file might be removed or renamed concurrently. >> > pg_rewind needs to do just that, although this could be useful for other >> > purposes too. (The changes to pg_rewind to use these functions will come in >> > a separate commit.) >> > >> > The read_binary_file() function isn't very well-suited for extensions.c's >> > purposes anymore, if it ever was. So bite the bullet and make a copy of it >> > in extension.c, tailored for that use case. This seems better than the >> > accidental code reuse, even if it's a some more lines of code. >> >> This has been done done as the part of a fix for the issues with >> pg_rewind, but perhaps it should be mentioned in the release notes? > > Yes, I will pick up that change during the creation of the 9.6 release > notes. Even if it has been introduced in 9.5? -- Michael
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 09:41:08PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 9:39 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 08:44:41PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 3:39 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
> >> <heikki.linnakangas@iki.fi> wrote:
> >> > Add missing_ok option to the SQL functions for reading files.
> >> >
> >> > This makes it possible to use the functions without getting errors, if there
> >> > is a chance that the file might be removed or renamed concurrently.
> >> > pg_rewind needs to do just that, although this could be useful for other
> >> > purposes too. (The changes to pg_rewind to use these functions will come in
> >> > a separate commit.)
> >> >
> >> > The read_binary_file() function isn't very well-suited for extensions.c's
> >> > purposes anymore, if it ever was. So bite the bullet and make a copy of it
> >> > in extension.c, tailored for that use case. This seems better than the
> >> > accidental code reuse, even if it's a some more lines of code.
> >>
> >> This has been done done as the part of a fix for the issues with
> >> pg_rewind, but perhaps it should be mentioned in the release notes?
> >
> > Yes, I will pick up that change during the creation of the 9.6 release
> > notes.
>
> Even if it has been introduced in 9.5?
Well, this is where I got lost then, because I only see it going into
master, which, uh, I thought was 9.6, but I am now realizing this was
committed before we branched. :-( This will be picked up when the 9.5
release notes are updated to match git.
Actually, I now see this in the 9.5 release notes:
<simpara>Current as of 2015-08-03</simpara>
This was updated by Tom:
ecc2d16b (Tom Lane 2015-08-03 12:29:10 -0400 10) <simpara>Current as of 2015-08-03</simpara>
and I see Tom added it properly:
<!--
2015-06-28 [cb2acb1] Heikki..: Add missing_ok option to the SQL functions for..
-->
<para>
Add an optional <replaceable>missing_ok</> argument to <link
linkend="functions-admin-genfile-table"><function>pg_read_file()</></>
and related functions (Michael Paquier, Heikki Linnakangas)
</para>
</listitem>
so, after all that detail, I think we are good.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 10:17:44AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > and I see Tom added it properly: > > <!-- > 2015-06-28 [cb2acb1] Heikki..: Add missing_ok option to the SQL functions for.. > --> > <para> > Add an optional <replaceable>missing_ok</> argument to <link > linkend="functions-admin-genfile-table"><function>pg_read_file()</></> > and related functions (Michael Paquier, Heikki Linnakangas) > </para> > </listitem> > > so, after all that detail, I think we are good. I think the crux of the issue is that I am coming to these emails late, and much of the maintenance is happening with little visibility. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. +