Neil Conway wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-02-01 at 22:50 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Where are we on this?
> I can commit to reviewing this. The patch looked fairly solid on a quick
> glance through, but I won't have the cycles to review it properly for a
> week or two.
I've brought this up to date with the operator family stuff now, and the
attached patch once more applies cleanly against HEAD. Hopefully that'll
make life a little easier when reviewing it. Thanks.
I got sick of manually shifting the new OID values every time someone
had added something new to the catalogs, so I moved all of my OIDs up to
the 9000 range. Attached is a hacky bash script which can move them back
to something sane. The idea is to run unused_oids first, see where the
main block of unused OIDs starts, and then run shift_oids on the
(unzipped) patch file before applying the patch. We discussed something
similar a while ago, but no-one ever got around to implementing the script.
I've attached the script and left the OIDs in my patch in the upper
range rather than just running it myself before submitting the patch as
I reckon that this might be a useful convention for authors of patches
which add a non-trivial number of OIDs to the catalogs. If there's
agreement then anyone can feel free to commit the script to CVS or put
it on the wiki or whatever.
Description: text/plain (823 bytes)
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Stephen Frost||Date: 2007-02-14 00:20:09|
|Subject: Re: Fixing insecure security definer functions|
|Previous:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2007-02-13 23:57:31|
|Subject: Re: Writing triggers in C++|
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2007-02-14 00:39:08|
|Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Use non-deprecated APIs for
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2007-02-13 23:17:03|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Another aspect of set_ps_display ()|