Re: [bugfix] sepgsql didn't follow the latest core API changes

From: Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PgHacker <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [bugfix] sepgsql didn't follow the latest core API changes
Date: 2012-09-05 20:35:03
Message-ID: CADyhKSXC2gKDzYh0CJwkp25S4J6excxJ0Mzgcevppukr8G0H5w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2012/9/5 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> wrote:
>> This patch fixes a few portions on which sepgsql didn't follow the latest
>> core API changes.
>>
>> 1) Even though the prototype of ProcessUtility_hook was recently changed,
>> sepgsql side didn't follow this update, so it made build failed.
>>
>> 2) sepgsql internally uses GETSTRUCT() and HeapTupleGetOid() macro
>> these were moved to htup_details.h, so it needs an additional #include
>> for "access/htup_defails.h".
>>
>> 3) sepgsql internally used a bool typed variable named "abort".
>> I noticed it conflicts with ereport macro because it internally expanded to
>> ereport_domain that contains invocation of "abort()". So, it renamed this
>> variables to abort_on_violation.
>>
>> #define ereport_domain(elevel, domain, rest) \
>> (errstart(elevel, __FILE__, __LINE__, PG_FUNCNAME_MACRO, domain) ? \
>> (errfinish rest) : (void) 0), \
>> ((elevel) >= ERROR ? abort() : (void) 0)
>>
>> This does not affect to v9.2, so please apply it on the master branch.
>
> I have committed this untested. It seems pretty mechanical and I
> assume that you tested it. Anyway, it's certainly broken without the
> patch.
>
Thanks, I'd like to pay attention to core API changes more.

I still have one other bug fix for v9.2 and master branch.
Isn't it obvious to apply?

http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/CADyhKSVWKjCKY3cDeQG6qp7OczqsbJtT9cihk3HB7TkvcEDD+Q@mail.gmail.com
--
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2012-09-05 20:40:54 Re: pg_upgrade diffs on WIndows
Previous Message Kohei KaiGai 2012-09-05 20:25:37 Re: [bugfix] sepgsql didn't follow the latest core API changes