Re: Ticket 269: Add support for 9.1 ALTER TYPE new syntax for enum
От | Dave Page |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Ticket 269: Add support for 9.1 ALTER TYPE new syntax for enum |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTikVMwjg7jG4zd9n58ONGwLtiScqo6YP+S5oeWjs@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Ticket 269: Add support for 9.1 ALTER TYPE new syntax for enum (Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info>) |
Ответы |
Re: Ticket 269: Add support for 9.1 ALTER TYPE
new syntax for enum
(Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info>)
|
Список | pgadmin-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > Le 02/11/2010 07:18, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit : >> Le 02/11/2010 05:49, Dave Page a écrit : >>> On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Guillaume Lelarge >>> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >>>> Le 31/10/2010 09:44, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit : >>>>> Le 31/10/2010 00:39, Dave Page a écrit : >>>>>> On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 1:56 AM, Guillaume Lelarge >>>>>> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >>>>>>> Le 30/10/2010 10:25, Dave Page a écrit : >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yeah, that's really nasty. I guess we need split the commands at ;. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yeah. If it's not between quotes. I don't like it at all, but I don't >>>>>>> see another way of doing it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I guess we should pass a flag down somehow to tell the function that >>>>>>>> executes the query to do that and then we could also potentially get >>>>>>>> rid of the double SQL boxes. I'm not looking at the code, but I >>>>>>>> suspect that'll be nasty. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We actually aren't required to add such a flag. We can check if the >>>>>>> query contains "ALTER TYPE", and "ADD AFTER" or "ADD BEFORE". >>>>>> >>>>>> That's knowledge I'd rather avoid hardwiring into the lower level >>>>>> machinery here. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So do I. I tried a few things yesterday. Changing the apply() and >>>>> GetSql() parameters imply to change all GetSql for all dlg* source code. >>>>> That will be quite an invasive patch. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I've done the "split-the-queries" function. Seems to work great, but >>>> still doesn't cover dollar quoting. Anyway, it's less ugly than I >>>> thought. The interesting part is dlgProperty::SplitQueries(). Would love >>>> to get comments :) >>> >>> I just eyeballed the patch - if I'm reading it right, it splits *all* >>> queries and executes each part individually. Is that correct? >>> >> >> Right. >> >>> If so, we're going to need that flag. Most of the time, we want all >>> the query parts to be executed atomically, otherwise if we get and >>> error (particularly when using the Apply button where there is one), >>> the dialogue won't know what parts of the update work and what didn't, >>> and thus will have a difficult job refreshing the display >>> appropriately. >>> >> >> Yeah, that was the part I wanted to work on yesterday. I have an idea on >> this, I actually have the code, but it doesn't work :-/ Need some more work. >> > > Done. I'm actually quite happy with how it turns out. Less nasty then I > previously thought. Complete patch attached (alterenum_v1.patch). The > last part of the work is available on the patch 0001* attached to this > email. Or you can get a look at my branch on github > (http://github.com/gleu/pgadmin3/commits/ticket269). > > Probably I should change the method name... WannaSplitQueries is > probably not the best one we could find :) Seems like a nice solution. And the name is descriptive, if nothing else :-) -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgadmin-hackers по дате отправления: