Thread: Re: FW: Patch for current_schemas to optionally include implicit
> -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us] > Sent: 14 June 2002 06:25 > To: Bruce Momjian > Cc: Dave Page; pgsql-patches@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [PATCHES] FW: Patch for current_schemas to > optionally include implicit > > > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied > patches list at: > > http://candle.pha.pa.us/cgi-bin/pgpatches > > I will try to apply it within the next 48 hours. > > I believe I objected to that one... we need something like it > but Dave's first cut wasn't right. Second cut attached. This one just adds a boolean option to the existing function to indicate that implicit schemas are to be included (or not). I remembered the docs as well this time :-) BTW: Tom, I noticed that temp schemas get added to the path before pg_catalog - I would have expected pg_catalog to always be first or have I missed something obvious? Regards, Dave.
Attachment
"Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk> writes:
> BTW: Tom, I noticed that temp schemas get added to the path before
> pg_catalog - I would have expected pg_catalog to always be first or have
> I missed something obvious?
It's open to debate I suppose. Past releases allow you to create and
use a temp table named the same as a system catalog, so I maintained
that behavior.
regards, tom lane
"Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk> writes:
>> I believe I objected to that one... we need something like it=20
>> but Dave's first cut wasn't right.
> Second cut attached. This one just adds a boolean option to the existing
> function to indicate that implicit schemas are to be included (or not).
> I remembered the docs as well this time :-)
This looks good --- but Bruce, when you apply it don't forget to bump
catversion.h.
regards, tom lane
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://candle.pha.pa.us/cgi-bin/pgpatches
I will try to apply it within the next 48 hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Page wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
> > Sent: 14 June 2002 06:25
> > To: Bruce Momjian
> > Cc: Dave Page; pgsql-patches@postgresql.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCHES] FW: Patch for current_schemas to
> > optionally include implicit
> >
> >
> > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > > Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied
> > patches list at:
> > > http://candle.pha.pa.us/cgi-bin/pgpatches
> > > I will try to apply it within the next 48 hours.
> >
> > I believe I objected to that one... we need something like it
> > but Dave's first cut wasn't right.
>
> Second cut attached. This one just adds a boolean option to the existing
> function to indicate that implicit schemas are to be included (or not).
> I remembered the docs as well this time :-)
>
> BTW: Tom, I noticed that temp schemas get added to the path before
> pg_catalog - I would have expected pg_catalog to always be first or have
> I missed something obvious?
>
> Regards, Dave.
Content-Description: current_schemas.patch
[ Attachment, skipping... ]
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
Tom Lane wrote: > "Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk> writes: > >> I believe I objected to that one... we need something like it=20 > >> but Dave's first cut wasn't right. > > > Second cut attached. This one just adds a boolean option to the existing > > function to indicate that implicit schemas are to be included (or not). > > I remembered the docs as well this time :-) > > This looks good --- but Bruce, when you apply it don't forget to bump > catversion.h. Yep, thanks, got it. Hold, do we need to bump catversion for changes that add new functionality, or just ones that make the system broken without it? Would this break an existing installation? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
>> This looks good --- but Bruce, when you apply it don't forget to bump
>> catversion.h.
> Yep, thanks, got it. Hold, do we need to bump catversion for changes
> that add new functionality, or just ones that make the system broken
> without it? Would this break an existing installation?
Yes, because the catalog entry for current_schemas wouldn't match the C
code.
regards, tom lane
Patch applied. Thanks. Catversion updated. initdb required, as mentioned by Tom Lane. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dave Page wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us] > > Sent: 14 June 2002 06:25 > > To: Bruce Momjian > > Cc: Dave Page; pgsql-patches@postgresql.org > > Subject: Re: [PATCHES] FW: Patch for current_schemas to > > optionally include implicit > > > > > > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > > Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied > > patches list at: > > > http://candle.pha.pa.us/cgi-bin/pgpatches > > > I will try to apply it within the next 48 hours. > > > > I believe I objected to that one... we need something like it > > but Dave's first cut wasn't right. > > Second cut attached. This one just adds a boolean option to the existing > function to indicate that implicit schemas are to be included (or not). > I remembered the docs as well this time :-) > > BTW: Tom, I noticed that temp schemas get added to the path before > pg_catalog - I would have expected pg_catalog to always be first or have > I missed something obvious? > > Regards, Dave. Content-Description: current_schemas.patch [ Attachment, skipping... ] > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026