| From: | Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Neel Patel <neel(dot)patel(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgadmin-hackers <pgadmin-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [pgagent]: Modified 'next_schedule' function and updated pgagent 4.2 version |
| Date: | 2020-04-24 09:23:27 |
| Message-ID: | CAKY1dXMmtRsh42iO9MEkvA5a5=yeF8gwH_nsMda1j1SvoxTtwA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgadmin-hackers |
On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 11:10 AM Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 12:21 PM Neel Patel <neel(dot)patel(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Please find an updated patch that fixes a bug in 'next_schedule' function
>> where minute should be extracted instead of year for calculation.
>>
>> Issue found by: Vik Fearing
>>
>> Please find the attached patch that fixed the issue in respective pgagent
>> files and updated pgagent for 4.2 version.
>>
>> Do review it and let me know for comments.
>>
>
> Any reason not to use the rewritten version of the function that Vik
> wrote? It updated it to use much more modern features of pl/pgsql, rather
> than the now 15 year old syntax that's currently used.
>
>
Well, the current version has received 15 years of testing (despite the bug
I found), and my rewrite has only received some local testing by me. I
would like to see my version eventually integrated, but I don't think it
should be rushed in.
--
Vik Fearing
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Aditya Toshniwal | 2020-04-24 09:25:36 | Re: [pgAdmin][RM1257] Ensure all object types have a "System XXX?" property |
| Previous Message | Dave Page | 2020-04-24 09:09:51 | Re: [pgagent]: Modified 'next_schedule' function and updated pgagent 4.2 version |