Re: Implemented current_query

This has been saved for the 8.4 release:

http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tomas Doran wrote:
>
> On 10 May 2007, at 03:09, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > FWIW I think you should still provide dblink_current_query, even if
> > it's
> > only a wrapper over current_query(), for backwards compatibility.
>
> Good point. Done as suggested (I think, or did you mean also the
> change of instances to use current_query()?). Replaced
> dblink_current_query with an SQL procedure wrapper, I assume that's
> the most efficient way of doing it?
>
> > Also, typically we don't remove items from the TODO list. We mark
> > them
> > as "done" prepending them with a dash. Patch authors are not expected
> > to do it either (though I don't see it be a problem if they did).
>
> Not quite sure what you're suggesting (which way round), so I just
> didn't do it (as you said I'm not expected to).
>
> > Doesn't matter ... just make sure duplicate_oids doesn't report a
> > problem. unused_oids is useful to find, err, unused OIDs.
>
> Ahh, hadn't found those, thanks. They're in the dev FAQ too, *blush*.
> I need this for something I'm doing at $ork, and thought I'd
> implement it in the backend, as well as a .so, it's been a learning
> experience :)
>
> >>> * AFAIK debug_query_string() still does the wrong thing when the
> >>> user
> >>
> >> Should that be added to the TODO list?
> >
> > Probably ...
>
> Done!
>
> Cheers
> Tom
>

[ Attachment, skipping... ]

>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +