Обсуждение: Re: [Pgpool-general] backend mismatch
Le jeudi 16 juillet 2009 à 15:48:58, Leonardo Carvalho a écrit : > Unfortunately, PgAdmin always sends this commands , trying to use > ISO date format. > If you discover how to fix that in PgAdmin, tell us! > There's no way to fix that without recompiling. But you can try the patch attached. I CC-ed pgadmin-hackers list so Dave can grab and check my patch :) Regards. -- Guillaume. http://www.postgresqlfr.org http://dalibo.com
Вложения
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Guillaume Lelarge<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > Le jeudi 16 juillet 2009 à 15:48:58, Leonardo Carvalho a écrit : >> Unfortunately, PgAdmin always sends this commands , trying to use >> ISO date format. >> If you discover how to fix that in PgAdmin, tell us! >> > > There's no way to fix that without recompiling. But you can try the patch > attached. > > I CC-ed pgadmin-hackers list so Dave can grab and check my patch :) Looks OK to me. What's the problem though - the SET, or having multiple command in one SQL query? If it's the latter, then that happens in a bunch of other places where it can't be fixed so easily. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Le lundi 20 juillet 2009 à 17:50:53, Dave Page a écrit : > On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Guillaume > > Lelarge<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > > Le jeudi 16 juillet 2009 à 15:48:58, Leonardo Carvalho a écrit : > >> Unfortunately, PgAdmin always sends this commands , trying to use > >> ISO date format. > >> If you discover how to fix that in PgAdmin, tell us! > > > > There's no way to fix that without recompiling. But you can try the patch > > attached. > > > > I CC-ed pgadmin-hackers list so Dave can grab and check my patch :) > > Looks OK to me. What's the problem though - the SET, or having > multiple command in one SQL query? If it's the latter, then that > happens in a bunch of other places where it can't be fixed so easily. The latter. I don't see a way to catch them all easily. I'll commit this, and try to find a way to catch the others. Thanks. (and welcome back :) ) -- Guillaume. http://www.postgresqlfr.org http://dalibo.com
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Guillaume Lelarge<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > The latter. I don't see a way to catch them all easily. I'll commit this, and > try to find a way to catch the others. Good luck with that. We use multi-sentence statements in practically every SQL dialogue to group together commands like "CREATE xxx; ALTER xxx; COMMENT ON xxx;" to run everything as one transaction without explicitly starting or ending one. Changing that would require some fairly invasive changes. I would suggest fixing pgpool so it supports multi-sentence statements as PostgreSQL has for as long as I can recall. > Thanks. > > (and welcome back :) ) Thanks :-) -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Le lundi 20 juillet 2009 à 19:06:50, Dave Page a écrit : > On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Guillaume > > Lelarge<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > > The latter. I don't see a way to catch them all easily. I'll commit this, > > and try to find a way to catch the others. > > Good luck with that. We use multi-sentence statements in practically > every SQL dialogue to group together commands like "CREATE xxx; ALTER > xxx; COMMENT ON xxx;" to run everything as one transaction without > explicitly starting or ending one. Changing that would require some > fairly invasive changes. > Hmmmm. You're right. I don't know why I didn't think about this. Should I revert my patch? it doesn't do any good (and no bad AFAICT). -- Guillaume. http://www.postgresqlfr.org http://dalibo.com
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:32 PM, Guillaume Lelarge<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > Le lundi 20 juillet 2009 à 19:06:50, Dave Page a écrit : >> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Guillaume >> >> Lelarge<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >> > The latter. I don't see a way to catch them all easily. I'll commit this, >> > and try to find a way to catch the others. >> >> Good luck with that. We use multi-sentence statements in practically >> every SQL dialogue to group together commands like "CREATE xxx; ALTER >> xxx; COMMENT ON xxx;" to run everything as one transaction without >> explicitly starting or ending one. Changing that would require some >> fairly invasive changes. >> > > Hmmmm. You're right. I don't know why I didn't think about this. Should I > revert my patch? it doesn't do any good (and no bad AFAICT). The downside is an extra roundtrip. If it doesn't help, let's back it out. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Le mardi 21 juillet 2009 à 10:12:37, Dave Page a écrit : > On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:32 PM, Guillaume > > Lelarge<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > > Le lundi 20 juillet 2009 à 19:06:50, Dave Page a écrit : > >> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Guillaume > >> > >> Lelarge<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > >> > The latter. I don't see a way to catch them all easily. I'll commit > >> > this, and try to find a way to catch the others. > >> > >> Good luck with that. We use multi-sentence statements in practically > >> every SQL dialogue to group together commands like "CREATE xxx; ALTER > >> xxx; COMMENT ON xxx;" to run everything as one transaction without > >> explicitly starting or ending one. Changing that would require some > >> fairly invasive changes. > > > > Hmmmm. You're right. I don't know why I didn't think about this. Should I > > revert my patch? it doesn't do any good (and no bad AFAICT). > > The downside is an extra roundtrip. If it doesn't help, let's back it out. OK, I will do. -- Guillaume. http://www.postgresqlfr.org http://dalibo.com