Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-21 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 21 May 2002 20:31 > To: Dave Page > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries > > Can you > trace it back a > little further and try to see why it's

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-21 Thread Tom Lane
"Dave Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I'm still interested in why explicitly saying "create view >> pg_catalog.foo" didn't work ... > I've just been playing with this as you suggested, and using an initdb > with both 'create view foo' and 'create view pg_catalog.bar', with the > -- style sw

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-21 Thread Tom Lane
"Dave Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Try changing the PGOPTS setting to use >> -c search_path=pg_catalog >> That shouldn't make any difference but ... > Shouldn't but does :-). Checked & double-checked, that works perfectly. I guess your version of getopt() won't cooperate with -- switche

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-21 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 21 May 2002 20:09 > To: Dave Page > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries > > > I guess your version of getopt() won't cooperate with -- > swit

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-21 Thread Tom Lane
"Dave Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Yes, but when I read this I realised that I forget to 'make clean' > before rebuilding. Having done that I then found that gdb eats about > 100Mb of memory and 50% of cpu without actually displaying itself until > killed 10 minutes later. I tried this twic

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-21 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 21 May 2002 16:33 > To: Dave Page > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries > > > > What I cannot do is get it to show me anything useful. > > It

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-21 Thread Tom Lane
> What I cannot do is get it to show me anything useful. It sounds like gdb does not have access to debugging symbol tables. Firstly, did you compile with -g (configure --enable-debug)? Secondly, did you point gdb at the postgres executable when you started it? regards,

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-21 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: Dave Page > Sent: 21 May 2002 14:39 > To: 'Tom Lane' > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [HACKERS] More schema queries > > > > Also, you could try setting a breakpoint at > > RangeVarGetCreationNamespac

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-21 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 21 May 2002 14:17 > To: Dave Page > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries > > > > Try changing the PGOPTS setting to use > > -c search_

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-21 Thread Tom Lane
"Dave Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This appears to work fine, so I hacked initdb to prepend the > 'pg_catalog.' to the viewnames. Cleared $PGDATA, confirmed I was running > the correct initdb, and still, the views are in public - Arrrggghhh! Weird. Maybe there is more than one bug involve

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-21 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 21 May 2002 01:00 > To: Dave Page > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries > > > "Dave Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I'

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-20 Thread Tom Lane
"Dave Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm confused. Does the standalone backend not deal with schemas fully > and is silently failing 'cos there's nothing technically wrong with the > pg_catalog.viewname syntax? The standalone backend does schemas just fine. What is supposed to ensure that t

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-20 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 17 May 2002 23:24 > To: Dave Page > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries > > > > 2200 | pg_stat_all_tables > > 2200 | pg_sta

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-20 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 20 May 2002 15:16 > To: Dave Page > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: More schema queries > > > "Dave Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > gcc -g -o postgres.exe -Wl,--base-file,postgres.base postgres.exp >

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-20 Thread Hannu Krosing
On Sat, 2002-05-18 at 01:01, Tom Lane wrote: > "Dave Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > It doesn't work quite like that anyway. > > Oh, so essentially you want to simulate the namespace search on the > application side. I see. > > > Anyway, current_schemas() seems ideal, thanks. > > It may

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-20 Thread Tom Lane
"Dave Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > gcc -g -o postgres.exe -Wl,--base-file,postgres.base postgres.exp > access/SUBSYS.o bootstrap/SUBSYS.o catalog/SUBSYS.o parser/SUBSYS.o > commands/SUBSYS.o executor /SUBSYS.o lib/SUBSYS.o libpq/SUBSYS.o > main/SUBSYS.o nodes/SUBSYS.o optimizer/SUBSYS.o por

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-20 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 18 May 2002 00:01 > To: Dave Page > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: More schema queries > > I'm not sure how to do it on Cygwin, either. On Unix you'd > build a profilable backend executable using >

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-18 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 18 May 2002 00:01 > To: Dave Page > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: More schema queries > > There was already some discussion about making a variant version of > current_schemas() that would tell you the Who

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-17 Thread Tom Lane
"Dave Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It doesn't work quite like that anyway. Oh, so essentially you want to simulate the namespace search on the application side. I see. > Anyway, current_schemas() seems ideal, thanks. It may not be exactly what you need, because it doesn't tell you about

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-17 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 17 May 2002 23:24 > To: Dave Page > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries > > > "Dave Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > help

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-17 Thread Tom Lane
"Dave Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > helpdesk=# select relnamespace, relname from pg_class where relname like > 'pg_%'; > relnamespace | relname > --+- > ... > 2200 | pg_user > 2200 | pg_rules > 2200 | pg_vie

Re: [HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-17 Thread Tom Lane
"Dave Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 1) All the system views are currently part of the public namespace. Not > a problem for me, but shouldn't they be in pg_catalog? Say what? They *are* in pg_catalog. initdb creates nothing in public. > 2) pgAdmin needs to be able to find out the namespa

[HACKERS] More schema queries

2002-05-17 Thread Dave Page
Hi, I have some schema queries/thoughts that I would appreciate some help/insights/fixes with/for please! (Apologies if these have been asked before or have been addressed in a recent snapshot - my ISP's been having routing problems recently & I can't reach postgresql.org via http right now). 1