On 2021/09/08 7:46, Tom Lane wrote:
Fujii Masao writes:
Pushed 0001 patch. Thanks!
The buildfarm shows that this test case isn't terribly reliable.
Yes... Thanks for reporting this!
TBH, I think you should just remove the test case altogether.
It does not look useful enough to justify
Fujii Masao writes:
> Pushed 0001 patch. Thanks!
The buildfarm shows that this test case isn't terribly reliable.
TBH, I think you should just remove the test case altogether.
It does not look useful enough to justify a permanent expenditure of
testing cycles, never mind the amount of effort tha
Dear Fujii-san, Ikeda-san,
> Pushed 0001 patch. Thanks!
I confirmed your commit. Thanks!
I attached the rebased version. Tests and descriptions were added.
In my understanding Ikeda-san's indication is included.
Best Regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED
v10_0002_allow_escapes.patch
Descript
On 2021/09/07 10:32, kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com wrote:
Dear Fujii-san,
I confirmed it and I think it's OK.
Other comments should be included in 0002.
Pushed 0001 patch. Thanks!
Could you rebase 0002 patch?
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Developmen
Dear Fujii-san,
I confirmed it and I think it's OK.
Other comments should be included in 0002.
Best Regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED
On 2021/09/06 10:32, kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com wrote:
I think we should SELECT ft6 because foreign server 'loopback'
doesn't have application_name server option.
Yes. I forgot to update that... Thanks for the review!
Attached is the updated version of the patch.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Adva
Dear Fujii-san,
Thank you for updating! Your modification is very interesting and
I learn something new.
> Attached is the updated version of the patch. I removed the test
> for case (1). And I arranged the regression tests so that they are based
> on debug_discard_caches, to simplify them. Also
On 2021/09/03 14:56, kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com wrote:
Dear Fujii-san,
Thank you for your great works. Attached is the latest version.
Thanks a lot!
I set four testcases:
(1) Sets neither GUC nor server option
(2) Sets server option, but not GUC
(3) Sets GUC but not server option
(4) Sets
Dear Fujii-san,
Thank you for your great works. Attached is the latest version.
> Thanks! What about updating the comments furthermore as follows?
>
> -
> Use pgfdw_application_name as application_name if set.
>
> PQconnectdbParams() processes the parameter array
On 2021/09/02 18:27, kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com wrote:
I added the following comments:
```diff
- /* Use "postgres_fdw" as fallback_application_name. */
+ /*
+* Use pgfdw_application_name as application_name.
+*
+* Note
Dear Fujii-san,
Thank you for reviewing!
> This GUC parameter should be set after the options of foreign server
> are set so that its setting can override the server-level ones.
> Isn't it better to comment this?
I added the following comments:
```diff
- /* Use "postgres_fdw" as f
On 2021/09/01 19:04, kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com wrote:
OK, I split and attached like that. 0001 adds new GUC, and
0002 allows to accept escapes.
Thanks for splitting and updating the patches!
Here are the comments for 0001 patch.
- /* Use "postgres_fdw" as fallback_application
Dear Fujii-san,
> Can we split the patch into two as follows? If so, we can review
> and commit them one by one.
>
> #1. Add application_name GUC into postgres_fdw
> #2. Allow to specify special escape characters in application_name that
> postgres_fdw uses.
OK, I split and attached like that. 0
On 2021/08/31 16:11, kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com wrote:
Dear Fujii-san,
I attached new version, that almost all codes
moved from libpq to postgres_fdw.
Thanks for updating the patch!
Can we split the patch into two as follows? If so, we can review
and commit them one by one.
#1. Add applica
Dear Fujii-san,
I attached new version, that almost all codes
moved from libpq to postgres_fdw.
Now we can accept four types of escapes.
All escapes will be rewritten to connection souce's information:
* application_name,
* user name,
* database name, and
* backend's pid.
These are cannot be se
Dear Fujii-san,
Thank you for replying! I attached new version.
> Why did you make even %u and %d available in application_name?
Actually no particular reason. I added them because they can easily add...
And I agree what you say, so removed.
> So some people may want to specify their own ID in
On 2021/08/05 12:18, kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com wrote:
Dear Hackers, Tom,
(I changed subject because this is no longer postgres_fdw's patch)
What would be better to think about is how to let users specify this
kind of behavior for themselves. I think it's possible to set
application_name as
Dear Hackers, Tom,
(I changed subject because this is no longer postgres_fdw's patch)
> > What would be better to think about is how to let users specify this
> > kind of behavior for themselves. I think it's possible to set
> > application_name as part of a foreign server's connection options,
Dear Tom,
Thank you for replying!
> I don't think this is a great idea as-is. People who need to do this
> sort of thing will all have their own ideas of what they need to track
> --- most obviously, it might be appropriate to include the originating
> server's name, else you don't know what mac
"kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com" writes:
> I propose adding trackable information in postgres_fdw, in order to track
> remote query correctly.
I don't think this is a great idea as-is. People who need to do this
sort of thing will all have their own ideas of what they need to track
--- most obviousl
Hi Hackers,
I propose adding trackable information in postgres_fdw, in order to track
remote query correctly.
## Background and motivation
Currently postgres_fdw connects remote servers by using connect_pg_server().
However the function just calls PQconnectdbParams() with
fallback_application
21 matches
Mail list logo
