Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: printTable API (was: Show INHERIT in \du)

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Subject: Re: printTable API (was: Show INHERIT in \du)
Date: 2008-04-03 00:41:56
Message-ID: 200804030041.m330fuH14583@momjian.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
The author has been given feedback so this has been saved for the next
commit-fest:

	http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brendan Jurd wrote:
> On 31/03/2008, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > There isn't any functional difference there.  I am not sure, but I think
> >  the reason print.c has its own malloc wrappers instead of depending on
> >  common.c's is that we use print.c in some bin/scripts/ programs that
> >  do not want common.c too.
> >
> 
> Okay, thanks (to Heikki as well) for the clarification.  It's good to
> know they are functionally equivalent.  I'll do some snooping in
> /scripts to get a better view of the situation.
> 
> >  >  2. describe only does an mbvalidate for WIN32, but print does it in all cases.
> >
> > I don't know why describe only does that for WIN32; it looks
> >  inconsistent to me too.  Possibly some trolling in the CVS history would
> >  give a clue about this.
> >
> 
> Alright, I'll be spending some quality time with 'annotate' then =)
> 
> >
> >  If you're not actively working on this patch right now, I am going to go
> >  ahead and commit the other open patches for describe.c.  If you do have
> >  a patch in progress, I'm willing to hold off to avoid any merge
> >  conflicts.  Let me know.
> >
> 
> I didn't get much beyond sketching out my struct.  Now that I have
> answers to the questions I raised above, I can push forward with the
> patch, but I wouldn't expect to have anything to submit for another
> couple of days at least.
> 
> Short answer: I have zero objections to you committing those patches.
> 
> Thanks for your time,
> BJ
> 
> -- 
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Ron MayerDate: 2008-04-03 00:42:08
Subject: Re: modules
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2008-04-03 00:34:27
Subject: Re: column level privileges

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2008-04-03 00:44:32
Subject: Re: actualized SQL/PSM patch
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2008-04-03 00:37:17
Subject: Re: Consistent \d commands in psql

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group