pgsql: Suppress some NOTICE messages from REINDEX command.

Started by Bruce Momjianover 19 years ago7 messageshackers
Jump to latest
#1Bruce Momjian
bruce@momjian.us

Log Message:
-----------
Suppress some NOTICE messages from REINDEX command.

Euler Taveira de Oliveira

Modified Files:
--------------
pgsql/src/bin/scripts:
reindexdb.c (r1.5 -> r1.6)
(http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/bin/scripts/reindexdb.c.diff?r1=1.5&r2=1.6)

#2Peter Eisentraut
peter_e@gmx.net
In reply to: Bruce Momjian (#1)
Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Suppress some NOTICE messages from REINDEX command.

Bruce Momjian wrote:

Suppress some NOTICE messages from REINDEX command.

This actually suppresses NOTICE messages in the reindexdb shell command.
Shouldn't those two behave the same, though?

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

#3Bruce Momjian
bruce@momjian.us
In reply to: Peter Eisentraut (#2)
Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Suppress some NOTICE

Peter Eisentraut wrote:

Bruce Momjian wrote:

Suppress some NOTICE messages from REINDEX command.

This actually suppresses NOTICE messages in the reindexdb shell command.
Shouldn't those two behave the same, though?

Not sure. I don't think the shell command and the SQL command have to
provide the same feedback. I don't think createuser does. Does
vacuumdb?

--
Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

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

#4Peter Eisentraut
peter_e@gmx.net
In reply to: Bruce Momjian (#3)
Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Suppress some NOTICE messages from REINDEX command.

Not sure. I don't think the shell command and the SQL command have
to provide the same feedback. I don't think createuser does. Does
vacuumdb?

Both createuser and vacuumdb provide the same feedback as the
corresponding SQL commands.

The more I think about it, the patch that just went in is an outright
mistake.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

#5Bruce Momjian
bruce@momjian.us
In reply to: Peter Eisentraut (#4)
Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Suppress some NOTICE

Peter Eisentraut wrote:

Not sure. I don't think the shell command and the SQL command have
to provide the same feedback. I don't think createuser does. Does
vacuumdb?

Both createuser and vacuumdb provide the same feedback as the
corresponding SQL commands.

The more I think about it, the patch that just went in is an outright
mistake.

Well, we had a lot of discussion when this patch was posted, and seveal
people liked it. I need someone else to say they want it reverted.

--
Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

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

#6Tom Lane
tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
In reply to: Bruce Momjian (#5)
Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Suppress some NOTICE

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:

Peter Eisentraut wrote:

Both createuser and vacuumdb provide the same feedback as the
corresponding SQL commands.

The more I think about it, the patch that just went in is an outright
mistake.

Well, we had a lot of discussion when this patch was posted, and seveal
people liked it. I need someone else to say they want it reverted.

I agree with Peter: that patch is a quick hack not a considered solution.

As for "several people said they liked it", where? I don't see even
one followup to
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2006-06/msg00049.php

regards, tom lane

#7Bruce Momjian
bruce@momjian.us
In reply to: Tom Lane (#6)
Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Suppress some NOTICE

Tom Lane wrote:

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:

Peter Eisentraut wrote:

Both createuser and vacuumdb provide the same feedback as the
corresponding SQL commands.

The more I think about it, the patch that just went in is an outright
mistake.

Well, we had a lot of discussion when this patch was posted, and seveal
people liked it. I need someone else to say they want it reverted.

I agree with Peter: that patch is a quick hack not a considered solution.

As for "several people said they liked it", where? I don't see even
one followup to
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2006-06/msg00049.php

The issue is that the patch was at the end of a thread, and no one said
they didn't like it, and no one said anything when it was placed in the
patch queue. I take that as acceptance.

But now that two people do not like it, patch reverted.

--
Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

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