Re: Patch for DBD::Pg pg_relcheck problem
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Patch for DBD::Pg pg_relcheck problem |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200212142337.gBENb1n00799@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Patch for DBD::Pg pg_relcheck problem (Ian Barwick <barwick@gmx.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Patch for DBD::Pg pg_relcheck problem
(Ian Barwick <barwick@gmx.net>)
Re: Patch for DBD::Pg pg_relcheck problem (David Wheeler <david@wheeler.net>) Re: Patch for DBD::Pg pg_relcheck problem (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-interfaces |
Thanks. Patch applied. David, time to package up a new version of DBD:Pg? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ian Barwick wrote: > On Monday 09 December 2002 17:03, Tom Lane wrote: > > Ian Barwick <barwick@gmx.net> writes: > > > To avoid voodoo with PostgreSQL version numbers > > > a check is made whether pg_relcheck exists and > > > the appropriate query (either 7.3 or pre 7.3) > > > executed. > > > > I would think that looking at version number (select version()) > > would be a much cleaner approach. Or do you think that direct > > examination of pg_class is a version-independent operation? > > No, but I was hoping it will remain stable for long enough > for what is basically a temporary work around until a revised version of > DBD::Pg can be produced. It doesn't make any more assumptions > about pg_class than are made elsewhere in the current Pg.pm. > > > This inquiry into pg_relcheck's existence is already arguably wrong > > in 7.3 (since it's not taking account of which schema pg_relcheck > > might be found in) and it can only go downhill in future versions. > > Doh. Knew I had to be missing something obvious. (Of course, > anyone using current DBD::Pg with 7.3 as is will have to take > extra care with system tables and schema namespaces anyway.) > > So out with the candle wax and pins ;-). Am I right > in thinking that the string returned by SELECT version() > starts with the word "PostgreSQL" followed by: > a space; > a single digit indicating the major version number; > a full stop / decimal point; > a single digit indicating the minor version number; > and either "interim release" number (e.g. ".1" in the case of 7.3.1), or > "devel", "rc1" etc. ? > And that this has been true since 6.x and will continue for the forseeable > future (i.e. far far longer than the intended lifespan of attached patch)? > > > Ian Barwick > barwick@gmx.net > > Attached: revised patch > > > > > > [ Attachment, skipping... ] -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania19073
В списке pgsql-interfaces по дате отправления: