From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Completing PL support for Event Triggers |
Date: | 2013-09-24 04:00:02 |
Message-ID: | 1379995202.8103.4.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 22:40 +0200, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> Please find attached to this email three patches covering the missing PL
> support for Event Triggers: pltcl, plperl and plpython.
You introduced some new compiler warnings, please fix those.
In the source code, I'm dubious about the use of is_dml_trigger. I can
see where you are coming from, but in most of the code, a trigger is a
trigger and an event trigger is an event trigger. Let's not introduce
more terminology.
Other opinions on that?
> Due to “platform” problems here tonight and the CF deadline, the
> plpython patch is known not to pass regression tests on my machine. The
> code is fully rebased and compiles without warning, though, so I'm still
> entering it into this CF: hopefully I will figure out what's wrong with
> my local plpython platform support here early next week.
For me, the plpython patch causes an (well, many) assertion failures in
the regression tests, because this change is wrong:
if (!found)
{
! /* Haven't found it, create a new cache entry */
! entry->proc = PLy_procedure_create(procTup, fn_oid,
! is_dml_trigger, is_evt_trigger);
if (use_cache)
entry->proc = proc;
}
When that is fixed, I get more failures and segfaults later.
Please give this another look. I'll review the Perl and Tcl things more
closely in the meantime.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2013-09-24 04:32:08 | Re: [RFC] Extend namespace of valid guc names |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2013-09-24 03:33:53 | Re: logical changeset generation v6 |