Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Thread: EVENT Keyword and CREATE TABLE

EVENT Keyword and CREATE TABLE

From
Brian Weaver
Date:
I think I just got bitten hard by a commit in mid July... git sha1 3855968.

In some of our old tables going back several years we a column named
'event' as in:

CREATE TABLE tblaudittrail (   id bigint NOT NULL,   siteid integer NOT NULL,   entrytype character varying(25),   form
charactervarying(50),   recordid integer,   field character varying(25),   changedfrom character varying(500),
changedtocharacter varying(500),   changedon timestamp with time zone,   changedby character varying(25),   event
charactervarying(1000)
 
);

I was working off trunk and the database refuses to create this table
any longer. Is this by design or is it a regression bug?

Thanks

-- Brian
-- 

/* insert witty comment here */

Re: EVENT Keyword and CREATE TABLE

From
Tom Lane
Date:
Brian Weaver <cmdrclueless@gmail.com> writes:
> In some of our old tables going back several years we a column named
> 'event' as in:
>     event character varying(1000)
> I was working off trunk and the database refuses to create this table
> any longer. Is this by design or is it a regression bug?

It's a bug.  The event-trigger patch added EVENT as a new keyword, but
forgot to list it in the unreserved_keywords production, which is
necessary to make it actually act unreserved.

I've committed a fix, and manually verified there are no other such
errors at present, but this isn't the first time this has happened.
We probably need to put in some automated cross-check, or it won't
be the last time either.
        regards, tom lane

Re: EVENT Keyword and CREATE TABLE

From
Dimitri Fontaine
Date:
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
> It's a bug.  The event-trigger patch added EVENT as a new keyword, but
> forgot to list it in the unreserved_keywords production, which is
> necessary to make it actually act unreserved.

Oh. Oops. Sorry about that.

> I've committed a fix, and manually verified there are no other such
> errors at present, but this isn't the first time this has happened.
> We probably need to put in some automated cross-check, or it won't
> be the last time either.

I see you've added the automated cross-check now, thanks for that!

Regards,
-- 
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr     PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support