From: | Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | salah jubeh <s_jubeh(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Add force option to dropdb |
Date: | 2014-01-28 03:17:29 |
Message-ID: | CAD21AoBWqAsoE_jFKyG2o++1Od_+b3NdaEFJH4E-miLNqSVUgg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014年1月17日 0:56, salah jubeh <s_jubeh(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
>
>>If the user owns objects, that will prevent this from working also. I
>>have the feeling that adding DROP OWNED BY and/or REASSIGNED OWNED BY
>>calls to this utility would be a bit excessive, but who knows.
>
> Please find attached the first attempt to drop drop the client connections.
> I have added an option -k, --kill instead of force since killing client
> connection does not guarantee -drop force-.
> Regards
>
>
> On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 8:06 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> salah jubeh wrote:
>
>> For the sake of completeness:
>> 1. I think also, I need also to temporary disallow conecting to the
>> database, is that right?
>> 2. Is there other factors can hinder dropping database?
>
> If the user owns objects, that will prevent this from working also. I
> have the feeling that adding DROP OWNED BY and/or REASSIGNED OWNED BY
> calls to this utility would be a bit excessive, but who knows.
>
>
>> 3. Should I write two patches one for pg_version>=9.2 and one for
>> pg_version<9.2
>
>
> No point -- nothing gets applied to branches older than current
> development anyway.
>
Thank you for the patch.
And sorry for delay in reviewing.
I started to look this patch, So the following is first review comment.
- This patch is not patched to master branch
I tried to patch this patch file to master branch, but I got following error.
$ cd postgresql
$ patch -d. -p1 < ../dropdb.patch
can't find fiel to patch at input line 3
Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
the text leading up to this was:
------------------------------
|--- dropdb_org.c 2014-01-16
|+++ dropdb.c 2014-01-16
------------------------------
There is not dropdb_org.c. I think that you made mistake when the
patch is created.
- This patch is not according the coding rule
For example, line 71 of the patch:
//new connections are not allowed
It should be:
/* new connections are not allowed */
(Comment blocks that need specific line breaks should be formatted as
block comments, where the comment starts as /*------.)
Please refer to coding rule.
<http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Developer_FAQ#What.27s_the_formatting_style_used_in_PostgreSQL_source_code.3F>
Regards,
-------
Sawada Masahiko
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sawada Masahiko | 2014-01-28 03:24:15 | Fix comment typo in /src/backend/command/cluster.c |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2014-01-28 02:50:34 | Re: pgsql: Keep pg_stat_statements' query texts in a file, not in shared me |