Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

On 10/5/17, 11:53 PM, "Jing Wang" wrote: > The patch has been updated according to Nathan's comments.  > Thanks Nathan's review. Thanks for the new versions of the patches. I apologize for the long delay for this new review. It looks like the no-pgdump patch needs a rebase at this point. I was

Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

Hi I don't know why the previous email can't be linked with the original email webpage. It is weird. So supplementing following information for understanding: The original email link: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAF3%2BxM%2BxSswcWQZMP1cjj12gPz8DXHcM9_fT1y-0fVzxi9pmOw%40mail.gmail.com T

Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

Hi all, The patch has been updated according to Nathan's comments. Thanks Nathan's review. Please find the updated patch in the attached files: comment_on_current_database_no_pgdump_v4.3.patch --- support current_database keyword exclude the pg_dump part. comment_on_current_database_for_pgdump_v4

Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

> On 15 Sep 2017, at 16:36, Bossart, Nathan wrote: > > A few general comments. > > While this patch applies, I am still seeing some whitespace errors: > > comment_on_current_database_no_pgdump_v4.1.patch:488: trailing whitespace. > ColId > comment_on_current_database_no_

Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

A few general comments. While this patch applies, I am still seeing some whitespace errors: comment_on_current_database_no_pgdump_v4.1.patch:488: trailing whitespace. ColId comment_on_current_database_no_pgdump_v4.1.patch:490: trailing whitespace.

Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

Hi Surafel, Sorry for that. Yes. The test case file is forgotten to be added into the previous patch. Kindly please use the updated patch in the attached file. Regards, Jing Wang Fujitsu Australia comment_on_current_database_no_pgdump_v4.1.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-h

Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Jing Wang wrote: > Please find the rebased patch based on latest version in the attached file. Hi Jing It looks like you created dbname.sql and dbname.out files for a regression test but forgot to "git add" them to your branch before you created the patch, so "ma

Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

Hi Surafel, Please find the rebased patch based on latest version in the attached file. Regards, Jing Wang Fujitsu Australia comment_on_current_database_for_pgdump_v4.patch Description: Binary data comment_on_current_database_no_pgdump_v4.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hac

Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Jing Wang wrote: > Hi all, > > Enclosed please find the updated patch with covering security labels on > database. > > The patch cover the following commands: > i can't apply your patch cleanly i think it needs rebase Regards Surafel

Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

i can't apply your patch cleanly i think it needs rebase Regards Surafel On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Jing Wang wrote: > Hi All, > > Enclosed please find the patch only for the pg_dump using the 'comment on > current_database' statement. > > This patch should be working with the previous

Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

Hi All, Enclosed please find the patch only for the pg_dump using the 'comment on current_database' statement. This patch should be working with the previous patch which is comment_on_current_database_no_pgdump_v3.patch Regards, Jing Wang Fujitsu Australia comment_on_current_database_for_pgdum

Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

Hi all, Enclosed please find the updated patch with covering security labels on database. The patch cover the following commands: 1. COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE is ... 2. ALTER DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE OWNER to ... 3. ALTER DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE SET parameter ... 4.

Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

Hi Surafel, >Your patch doesn't cover security labels on databases which have similar issue >and consider dividing the patch into two one for adding CURRENT_DATABASE as a >database specifier and the other for adding database-level information to pg_dump output >in a way that allows to load a dump

Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 4:09 AM, Jing Wang wrote: > Hi all, > > The attached patch is to support the feature "COMMENT ON DATABASE > CURRENT_DATABASE". The solution is based on the previous discussion in [2] . > Your patch doesn't cover security labels on databases which have similar issue and con

Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

Hi Michael, >You should add that to the next commit fest: >https://commitfest.postgresql.org/14/ Thanks your mention. I will do that. Regards, Jing Wang Fujitsu Australia

Re: [HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Jing Wang wrote: > By using the patch the CURRENT_DATABASE as a keyword can be used in the > following SQL commands: > > 1. COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE is ... > 2. ALTER DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE OWNER to ... > 3. ALTER DATABASE CURRENT_DATABAS

[HACKERS] Support to COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE

Hi all, The attached patch is to support the feature "COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_DATABASE". The solution is based on the previous discussion in [2] . Can't find the previous link in my email history list so create a new topic here. By using the patch the CURRENT_DATABASE as a keyword can be use