On 18 August 2011 00:22, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 11:38 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
>
>> Updated patch attached, along with a revised SQL script to make
>> testing easier. I can add this to the next CF.
>>
>> Note, there is a separate thread[1] with just the psql changes
[Resending with gzip'ed patch this time, I think the last attempt got eaten.]
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:15 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:57 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
1.) For now, I'm just ignoring the issue of visibility checks; I
didn't see a simple way to sup
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:57 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> Well, I was hoping to go by the existing psql backslash commands'
> notions about what qualifies as "system" and what doesn't; that worked
> OK for commands which supported the 'S' modifier, but not all do. For
> objects like tablespaces,
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 11:25 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Josh Kupershmidt
>> wrote:
> It seems funny to have is_system = true unconditionally for any object
> type. Why'd you do it that way? Or maybe I
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
>> I think we still need to handle my "Still TODO" concerns noted
>> upthread. I don't have a lot of time this weekend due to a family
>> event, but I was mulling over putting in a
On Jul 15, 2011, at 3:48 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Josh,
>
>> Fair enough. If the pg_comments patch does go down in flames, I can
>> circle back and patch up the rest of the holes in \dd.
>
> I am unable to figure out the status of the pg_comments patch from this
> thread. What's going on with i
Josh,
> Fair enough. If the pg_comments patch does go down in flames, I can
> circle back and patch up the rest of the holes in \dd.
I am unable to figure out the status of the pg_comments patch from this
thread. What's going on with it?
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>>> I was kind of hoping to avoid dealing with this can of worms with this
>>> simple patch, which by itself seems uncontroversial. If there's
>>> consensus that \dd and the other backslas
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 10:00 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
[review of original, small patch to add another type to \dd's output]
> I am inclined to say that we should reject this patch as it stands.
That's totally OK - that original patch was of marginal use given the
larger brokenness of \dd.
> With
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> I was kind of hoping to avoid dealing with this can of worms with this
>> simple patch, which by itself seems uncontroversial. If there's
>> consensus that \dd and the other backslash commands need further
>> reworking, I can probably devo
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> Patch applies clean, does what it is supposed to do, and matches other
> conventions in describe.c Passing to committer. pg_comments may be
> a better way to go, but that is a problem for another day...
Thanks for the review, and sorry
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 9:36 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> At the risk of opening a can of worms, if we're going to fix \dd,
>> shouldn't we fix it completely, and include comments on ALL the object
>> types that can have them? IIRC it's mi
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 3:25 AM, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
> 2011/6/18 Josh Kupershmidt :
> I think the v5 patch should be marked as 'Ready for Committer'
I think we still need to handle my "Still TODO" concerns noted
upthread. I don't have a lot of time this weekend due to a family
event, but I was mu
I think the v5 patch should be marked as 'Ready for Committer'
2011/6/18 Josh Kupershmidt :
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
>> In addition, this pg_comments system view supports 'access method' class, but
>> we cannot set a comment on access methods using COMMENT ON statem
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
>> Regarding to the data-type of objnamespace, how about an idea to define a new
>> data type such as 'regschema' and cast objnamespace into this type?
>> If we have such data type, user can reference string expression of schema
>> name,
>>
I checked the v4 patch.
At first, I noticed three missing object classes although COMMENT ON allows to
set a description on 'collation', 'extension' and 'foreign table'.
In addition, this pg_comments system view supports 'access method' class, but
we cannot set a comment on access methods using CO
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Alvaro Herrera
>> wrote:
>>> Hmm, if we're going to have pg_comments as a syntactic sugar kind of
>>> thing, it should output things in format immediately useful to the user,
>>> i.e. relatio
Robert Haas writes:
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>> Hmm, if we're going to have pg_comments as a syntactic sugar kind of
>> thing, it should output things in format immediately useful to the user,
>> i.e. relation/column/etc names and not OIDs. The OIDs would force y
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Excerpts from Josh Kupershmidt's message of dom jun 05 16:36:57 -0400 2011:
>> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:31 PM, Josh Kupershmidt
>> wrote:
>> > Attached is a rebased patch. From a quick look, it seems that most of
>> > the object types mis
Excerpts from Josh Kupershmidt's message of dom jun 05 16:36:57 -0400 2011:
> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:31 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> > Attached is a rebased patch. From a quick look, it seems that most of
> > the object types missing from \dd are already covered by pg_comments
> > (cast, cons
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> Well actually, I got into messing with this solely from the Todo list.
> Which, of course, neglected to mention the thread about pg_comments,
> or the other objects missing from \dd.
Heh. Sounds like updating the Todo list would be a go
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
>> Precisely, and I think there's a solid argument for putting
>> constraints into bucket 1 above, as this patch does, since there's no
>> good room to display constraint comments insi
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> Precisely, and I think there's a solid argument for putting
> constraints into bucket 1 above, as this patch does, since there's no
> good room to display constraint comments inside \d+, and there's no
> backslash command specifically for
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> At the risk of opening a can of worms, if we're going to fix \dd,
> shouldn't we fix it completely, and include comments on ALL the object
> types that can have them? IIRC it's missing a bunch, not just
> constraints.
You opened this can up,
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 10:27 PM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Attached is a simple patch addressing the TODO item "Allow \dd to show
> constraint comments". If you have comments on various constraints
> (column, foreign key, primary key, unique, exclusion), they should
> show up via \dd
25 matches
Mail list logo
