Re: [PATCHES] [BUGS] BUG #1962: ECPG and VARCHAR

First, let me thank you for the effort you have been putting into the
Postgresql development. It is a great system. It performs well and with
the exception of a few little annoyances is a great competitor to Mysql
or Oracle!

This particular bug isn't a show stopper; I could have easily found a
way around it if I wanted to. Instead I decided to fall back to 8.0.3
since this will be fixed hopefully in 8.0.5. But it did make me think
of something else.

I would like to make a suggestion, if you don't mind. I don't mind
running the bleeding edge of things, and if you go to the gentoo bugs
you will see quite a few posted by me. My suggestion - and it might be
simply due to my not knowing where to look - is perhaps there should be
a simple way to find the bugs that are still outstanding or when they
resolved or how. On bugs.gentoo.org I can type in CUPS for example and
find out everything - resolved, past and present and outstanding, bugs
related to cups. I can find nothing on the postgresql site.

FWIW,
Chuck Wegrzyn

Bruce Momjian wrote:

>Michael Paesold wrote:
>
>
>>[moved to hackers]
>>
>>Is this a regression in the stable branches? If so, shouldn't we do a new
>>release rather immediately? What do others think about this situation?
>>
>>Can you remember regressions in stable branches in the past? How were those
>>it handled? I think "waiting for months" (i.e. for the next major bug fixes)
>>is not the correct answer here. IMHO, the latest released version should be
>>known best in all components.
>>
>>
>
>Yea, it is a regression, and yea, we hate when that happens. Let's see
>how many people have a problem with it and we can review if we need a
>minor release to fix it.
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>>Best Regards,
>>Michael Paesold
>>
>>
>>Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Michael Fuhr wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 09:49:20AM -0600, Michael Fuhr wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>ecpg in 8.0.4 seems not to like the macros. I get the same error,
>>>>>but not if I do this:
>>>>>
>>>>> VARCHAR t[256];
>>>>> VARCHAR o[256];
>>>>>
>>>>>ecpg in 8.1beta3 works either way.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>This appears to be the guilty commit, which was made to 7.4, 8.0,
>>>>and HEAD (8.1):
>>>>
>>>>http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2005-08/msg00266.php
>>>>
>>>>It was recently fixed in HEAD only:
>>>>
>>>>http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2005-10/msg00043.php
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Good catch! I have backpatched these fixes to the 8.0 and 7.4 branches
>>>as you suggested, (identical) patches attached.
>>>
>>>The big problem is that we might not make releases on these branches for
>>>months, so anyone needing the fix should download CVS for those
>>>branches.
>>>
>>>
>>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>>TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>>
>> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>