Dimitri Fontaine writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> [ scratches head ... ] Why is your version generating so many
>> unnecessary @extschema@ uses?
> I just ran create table tomlist as select your query and create table
> dimlist as select my query, then:
> ...
> No difference on @extschema@ use here
Tom Lane writes:
> [ scratches head ... ] Why is your version generating so many
> unnecessary @extschema@ uses?
I just ran create table tomlist as select your query and create table
dimlist as select my query, then:
dim=# select * from tomlist except select * from dimlist;
Dimitri Fontaine writes:
> Do we want to add such a query in the docs to help pgfoundry authors to
> write their own 'from unpackaged' scripts?
[ scratches head ... ] Why is your version generating so many
unnecessary @extschema@ uses?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgs
On 02/15/2011 04:49 PM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
Ah well sed makes it simpler to read, but it won't be usable in windows.
You can make perl do the same stuff (and perl has psed anyway), and perl
is required for MSVC builds.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-h
Tom Lane writes:
> Just for the archives' sake: the '@extschema@' business did turn out to
> be important, at least for tsearch2 where it's necessary to distinguish
> the objects it's dealing with from similarly-named objects in
> pg_catalog. So this is what I used to generate the "unpackaged"
>
I wrote:
> Dimitri Fontaine writes:
>> I think you'd be interested into this reworked SQL query. It should be
>> providing exactly the script file you need as an upgrade from unpackaged.
> This seems overly complicated. I have a version of it that I'll publish
> as soon as I've tested it on all
Tom Lane writes:
> I don't really think that's a behavior we want to encourage. ISTM the
> cases that are going to be trouble are paths you failed to think about,
> and therefore what you want to do is look over the whole output set to
> see if there are any surprising paths...
Mmm, yes. Ok.
-
Dimitri Fontaine writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>>> [ about omitting rows for which there is no update path ]
>> Yeah, possibly. I'm a bit concerned about cases where the author meant
>> to provide an update path and forgot: it would be fairly obvious in this
>> representation but maybe you could k
Tom Lane writes:
> I intentionally left out columns that seem like extension implementation
> details rather than things users of the extension need to know. Hence,
> no directory, encoding, or module_pathname. There's no fundamental
> reason not to include these, I guess, although maybe there c
Dimitri Fontaine writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> and pg_available_extension_versions that produces a row per install
>> script, with columns
>>
>> name
>> version ((name, version) is primary key)
>> comment
>> requires
>> relocatable
>> schema
>>
>> where the last four column
Tom Lane writes:
> Thinking about this some more ... it seems like we now need two separate
> views, because there is some information that could change per-version,
> and some that really only makes sense at the per-extension level.
Makes sense.
> For instance, we could have pg_available_extens
Dimitri Fontaine writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> Also, I've been looking at the pg_available_extensions issue a bit.
>> I don't yet have a proposal for exactly how we ought to redefine it,
>> but I did notice that the existing code is terribly confused by
>> secondary control files: it doesn't real
"David E. Wheeler" writes:
> On Feb 13, 2011, at 4:59 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I suppose if you really wanted foo.sql to always be the head version,
>> you could do something like "cp foo.sql foo--$VERSION.sql" as part of
>> the build process in the Makefile.
> That would be okay. Is $EXTVERSION st
On Feb 13, 2011, at 4:59 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think after a couple of releases you'd be shipping something like
>
> foo--1.0.sql
> foo--1.1.sql
> foo--1.0--1.1.sql
> foo--2.0.sql
> foo--1.1--2.0.sql
>
> and it'll soon get to be a mess if your SCM doesn't clearly
"David E. Wheeler" writes:
> On Feb 13, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> (2) I think that the normal use-case would not involve removing the old
>> file, so this is moot anyhow.
> Oh. So one normally will ship, for an extension "foo", only "foo.sql" and any
> necssary upgrade scripts?
I thi
On Feb 13, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I sure would like it if the install script with no version in it
>> corresponded to the latest version. Otherwise, one must rename the file
>> every time one does a release. And as you're noting, you lose Git history
>> that way.
>
> (1) git does
"David E. Wheeler" writes:
> I sure would like it if the install script with no version in it corresponded
> to the latest version. Otherwise, one must rename the file every time one
> does a release. And as you're noting, you lose Git history that way.
(1) git does know it's a rename, it's jus
On Feb 13, 2011, at 11:34 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> OK, so with that, attached is an example of the complete conversion diff
> for a contrib module (hstore in particular). Although "git status"
> reports hstore--1.0.sql as being a rename of hstore.sql.in, "git diff"
> doesn't seem to be exceedingly b
Tom Lane writes:
> Yes, it should be unnecessary given the search_path setup done by
> execute_extension_script(). Also, I think that a relocatable
> extension's script should not be subject to @extschema@ substitution,
> no matter what.
Oh I'm just realizing that my reasoning predates the searc
Dimitri Fontaine writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> OK, so with that, attached is an example of the complete conversion diff
>> for a contrib module (hstore in particular). Although "git status"
> I see you're not using the @extschema@ placeholder in the upgrade
> script. It is intentional?
Yes, i
Tom Lane writes:
>> Tom Lane writes:
>>> I think it's better to keep it working as a textual substitution.
Thinking about this some more, it has the advantage that the effects of
the control file settings are kept within the script file processing and
pg_extension catalog. The only backend impa
Dimitri Fontaine writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> I think it's better to keep it working as a textual substitution.
>> That poses the least risk of breaking scripts that work today ---
>> who's to say that somebody might not be relying on the substitution
>> happening someplace else than CREATE FUNC
Tom Lane writes:
> I think it's better to keep it working as a textual substitution.
> That poses the least risk of breaking scripts that work today ---
> who's to say that somebody might not be relying on the substitution
> happening someplace else than CREATE FUNCTION's shlib string?
Fair enoug
Dimitri Fontaine writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> I'm hesitant to have any substitutions that happen unconditionally,
>> but we could add a control parameter like
>> module_pathname = '$libdir/hstore'
>> and then things would be pretty clean.
> Ok. Maybe the simpler would be to make the current co
Tom Lane writes:
> Or are you suggesting substituting for MODULE_PATHNAME during CREATE
> EXTENSION, and not during "make" at all? That would work I guess.
That's my idea, sorry not having made it clear enough. We have $libdir
which is expanded server-side AFAIUI, I though we would have $shlib
Dimitri Fontaine writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> But contrib/spi is exactly the case where it *won't* work. We need to
>> somehow figure out that $libdir/autoinc is what to substitute in
>> autoinc-1.0.sql, $libdir/insert_username in insert_username-1.0.sql,
>> etc.
> Indeed. That's why I'm prop
Tom Lane writes:
>> My take here is to way that in this case, the current (9.1) way to deal
>> with the situation is to have multiple extensions when you have multiple
>> shlibs. After all we know that multiple extensions from the same
>> Makefile works, thanks to contrib/spi (I mean extension/sp
Tom Lane writes:
> Right, the basic difficulty here is exactly that in a Makefile that's
> building multiple shlibs, there is no easy way to decide which shlibs go
> with which sql scripts. The existing implementation essentially relies
> on the base name of the sql script matching the base name
On Feb 12, 2011, at 3:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> How likely is *that*?
>
> Not very, but the rules are getting a bit complicated ...
Doesn't seem complicated to me:
1. Use -- to separate extension name, old version, new version
2. Don't use - at the beginning or end of name or version number
3.
"David E. Wheeler" writes:
> On Feb 12, 2011, at 3:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hm. I think we'd still have to disallow dash as the first or last
>> character in a version name to make that unambiguous. Not sure it's
>> worth the trouble.
> How likely is *that*?
Not very, but the rules are gettin
On Feb 12, 2011, at 3:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> "David E. Wheeler" writes:
>> On Feb 12, 2011, at 2:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I did think of another idea besides forbidding dash in extension names:
>>> what if we use double dash as the name/version separator,
>
>> +1 You might even consider mand
"David E. Wheeler" writes:
> On Feb 12, 2011, at 2:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I did think of another idea besides forbidding dash in extension names:
>> what if we use double dash as the name/version separator,
> +1 You might even consider mandating a double-dash between versions, so that
> they
On Feb 12, 2011, at 2:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I did think of another idea besides forbidding dash in extension names:
> what if we use double dash as the name/version separator, ie the naming
> conventions are like
> extension--version.control
> extension--version.sql
> extensio
Dimitri Fontaine writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> Right, the basic difficulty here is exactly that in a Makefile that's
>> building multiple shlibs, there is no easy way to decide which shlibs go
>> with which sql scripts. The existing implementation essentially relies
>> on the base name of the sq
Dimitri Fontaine writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> pgxs.mk will substitute for MODULE_PATHNAME in it is
>> "$libdir/hstore-1.0" ... not exactly what's wanted. This is because the
>> transformation rule depends on $*, ie the base name of the input file.
> A though that is occurring to me here would
Tom Lane writes:
> pgxs.mk will substitute for MODULE_PATHNAME in it is
> "$libdir/hstore-1.0" ... not exactly what's wanted. This is because the
> transformation rule depends on $*, ie the base name of the input file.
[...]
> On balance #3 seems the least bad, but I wonder if anyone sees this
>
36 matches
Mail list logo
