ECPG - Some errno definitions don't match to the manual

2010/7/22 Satoshi Nagayasu <satoshi.nagayasu@gmail.com>:

Hi all,

I'm looking into some ecpg part of the official manual,
and I have found some strange things.

I'm now investigating SQLCODE and SQLSTATE, and I have found
that some of the errno definitions don't match to the manual.

For example, the manual says that ECPG_CONVERT_BOOL could be `-207'.
However, ECPG_CONVERT_BOOL is defined as `-211' in ecpgerrno.h.

-207 (ECPG_CONVERT_BOOL)

    This means the host variable is of type bool and the datum in the database is neither 't' nor 'f'. (SQLSTATE 42804)

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/ecpg-errors.html

#define ECPG_NUMERIC_FORMAT           -207
#define ECPG_CONVERT_BOOL             -211

http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/interfaces/ecpg/include/ecpgerrno.h?rev=1.27;content-type=text%2Fx-cvsweb-markup;only_with_tag=REL9_0_STABLE

What does it mean? The manual is not up to date?

Yeah, I think that's what it means. Perhaps you could provide a patch
for the docs?

Another question is whether we oughn't to remove all mention of the
specific values of these constants from the documentation. That
wouldn't prevent all problems in this area, because constants can
still be added and removed, but ISTM that including the specific
numerical values here is encouraging people to depend on those values
when they probably shouldn't.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company

On 2010/08/09 21:27, Robert Haas wrote:

I'm now investigating SQLCODE and SQLSTATE, and I have found
that some of the errno definitions don't match to the manual.

What does it mean? The manual is not up to date?

Yeah, I think that's what it means. Perhaps you could provide a patch
for the docs?

Sure, I will make a patch for this. Please wait a moment.

Another question is whether we oughn't to remove all mention of the
specific values of these constants from the documentation. That
wouldn't prevent all problems in this area, because constants can
still be added and removed, but ISTM that including the specific
numerical values here is encouraging people to depend on those values
when they probably shouldn't.

Hmm, it's a difficult point. From the application programmers' viewpoint, error codes and error numbers would be an interface between their application and PostgreSQL internals. So I think (and I hope) it should be in the programmer's manual. On the other hand, from the PostgreSQL developer's viewpoint, it is hard to maintain all of documents up to date. So removing them from the manual will make maintenance easier.

I found that this difference was generated by the very very old change in the code repository. And I think it would never be happen anymore, because nowadays PostgreSQL developers, especially code reviewers, always require "document updates/patches" for any patches before applying. (as all you know :)

I agree with that taking care about both code and documents is not so easy, but the current review/development process seems to be appropriate.

Any comments or suggestions?

--
NAGAYASU Satoshi <satoshi.nagayasu@gmail.com>

On 2010/08/10 1:36, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:

On 2010/08/09 21:27, Robert Haas wrote:

I'm now investigating SQLCODE and SQLSTATE, and I have found
that some of the errno definitions don't match to the manual.

What does it mean? The manual is not up to date?

Yeah, I think that's what it means. Perhaps you could provide a patch
for the docs?

Sure, I will make a patch for this. Please wait a moment.

A patch to fix this problem is attached.
Please take a look.

Regards,
--
NAGAYASU Satoshi <satoshi.nagayasu@gmail.com>

On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:29 PM, Satoshi Nagayasu
<satoshi.nagayasu@gmail.com> wrote:

On 2010/08/10 1:36, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:

On 2010/08/09 21:27, Robert Haas wrote:

I'm now investigating SQLCODE and SQLSTATE, and I have found
that some of the errno definitions don't match to the manual.

What does it mean? The manual is not up to date?

Yeah, I think that's what it means. Perhaps you could provide a patch
for the docs?

Sure, I will make a patch for this. Please wait a moment.

A patch to fix this problem is attached.
Please take a look.

I've applied the portion of this patch that just fixes the existing
entries to match ecpgerrno.h, and have back-patched it all the way
back to 7.4, since the contents of ecpgerrno.h haven't changed in the
interim. The remainder of this will need more review than I can give
it right now: since I'm not familiar with ECPG, I can't easily verify
that the new entries you've added are correct. I'd suggest posting a
new version and adding it here:

https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/commitfest_view/open

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company

On 2010/08/12 4:08, Robert Haas wrote:

On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:29 PM, Satoshi Nagayasu
<satoshi.nagayasu@gmail.com> wrote:

On 2010/08/10 1:36, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:

On 2010/08/09 21:27, Robert Haas wrote:

I'm now investigating SQLCODE and SQLSTATE, and I have found
that some of the errno definitions don't match to the manual.

A patch to fix this problem is attached.
Please take a look.

I've applied the portion of this patch that just fixes the existing
entries to match ecpgerrno.h, and have back-patched it all the way
back to 7.4, since the contents of ecpgerrno.h haven't changed in the
interim. The remainder of this will need more review than I can give
it right now: since I'm not familiar with ECPG, I can't easily verify
that the new entries you've added are correct. I'd suggest posting a
new version and adding it here:

https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/commitfest_view/open

Thank you for the commit, and I'll put the remainder
to the commitfest page.

Regards,
--
NAGAYASU Satoshi <satoshi.nagayasu@gmail.com>

On tor, 2010-08-12 at 09:51 +0900, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:

Thank you for the commit, and I'll put the remainder
to the commitfest page.

Please submit a new patch that applies on top of what was already
committed.

Hi Peter,

Thanks for your reviewing.

On 2010/09/26 20:57, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

On tor, 2010-08-12 at 09:51 +0900, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:

Thank you for the commit, and I'll put the remainder
to the commitfest page.

Please submit a new patch that applies on top of what was already
committed.

Here is a new patch applicable to the cvs head.
Please check it out.

Thanks,
--
NAGAYASU Satoshi <satoshi.nagayasu@gmail.com>

As a comment from Álvaro Herrera, I have made some changes around ENOMEM
from quotes to tags.

- Indicates that your virtual memory is exhausted, defined as `-ENOMEM'.

+ Indicates that your virtual memory is exhausted, defined as <literal>-ENOMEM</literal>.

Thanks,

On 2010/09/28 7:51, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:

Hi Peter,

Thanks for your reviewing.

On 2010/09/26 20:57, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

On tor, 2010-08-12 at 09:51 +0900, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:

Thank you for the commit, and I'll put the remainder
to the commitfest page.

Please submit a new patch that applies on top of what was already
committed.

Here is a new patch applicable to the cvs head.
Please check it out.

Thanks,

--
NAGAYASU Satoshi <satoshi.nagayasu@gmail.com>

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Satoshi Nagayasu
<satoshi.nagayasu@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Peter,

Thanks for your reviewing.

On 2010/09/26 20:57, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

On tor, 2010-08-12 at 09:51 +0900, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:

Thank you for the commit, and I'll put the remainder
to the commitfest page.

Please submit a new patch that applies on top of what was already
committed.

Here is a new patch applicable to the cvs head.
Please check it out.

Are you aware that we have switched to git?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company

On 2010/09/28 9:40, Robert Haas wrote:

Here is a new patch applicable to the cvs head.
Please check it out.

Are you aware that we have switched to git?

Oops, I visited a page describing about the coderepository
from here:

http://www.postgresql.org/developer/coding

Yeah, I know the code repository has been moved to Git,
but I believed that Git and anon-cvs are available
since the doc mentions with them both.

anon-cvs is not available for now?
If so, I have to learn Git at first.

Thanks,
--
NAGAYASU Satoshi <satoshi.nagayasu@gmail.com>

Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:

Oops, I visited a page describing about the coderepository
from here:

http://www.postgresql.org/developer/coding

I just made a pass through the wiki cleaning up all of the outdated CVS
related stuff I knew of there that this page was pointing to. It's a
sequential group of 9 changes to revert if we're forsaken and somehow
this conversion stops. Main thing left with obsolete info is
http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/cvs.html

Yeah, I know the code repository has been moved to Git,
but I believed that Git and anon-cvs are available
since the doc mentions with them both.

If the patch you generated applies to the git version of the repo
cleanly, you may be fine for now. The anon-cvs version is mainly
intended as a source to get a copy of the source code just to compile or
read, not to develop patches against. For that it would be better to
switch to git when you get some time to spend on that.

--
Greg Smith, 2ndQuadrant US greg@2ndQuadrant.com Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support www.2ndQuadrant.us
Author, "PostgreSQL 9.0 High Performance" Pre-ordering at:
https://www.packtpub.com/postgresql-9-0-high-performance/book

On 2010/09/28 10:31, Greg Smith wrote:

If the patch you generated applies to the git version of the repo cleanly, you may be fine for now. The anon-cvs version is mainly intended as a source to get a copy of the source code just to compile or read, not to develop patches against. For that it would be better to switch to git when you get some time to spend on that.

So, I have created another patch from git repository.
The attached one could be applied to the latest code.

Thanks,
--
NAGAYASU Satoshi <satoshi.nagayasu@gmail.com>

Excerpts from Satoshi Nagayasu's message of lun sep 27 22:38:44 -0400 2010:

On 2010/09/28 10:31, Greg Smith wrote:

If the patch you generated applies to the git version of the repo cleanly, you may be fine for now. The anon-cvs version is mainly intended as a source to get a copy of the source code just to compile or read, not to develop patches against. For that it would be better to switch to git when you get some time to spend on that.

So, I have created another patch from git repository.
The attached one could be applied to the latest code.

Looking at this patch I cannot but wonder if this should be a table
instead of a plain list.

--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

On 2010/09/28 12:40, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

Excerpts from Satoshi Nagayasu's message of lun sep 27 22:38:44 -0400 2010:

On 2010/09/28 10:31, Greg Smith wrote:

If the patch you generated applies to the git version of the repo cleanly, you may be fine for now. The anon-cvs version is mainly intended as a source to get a copy of the source code just to compile or read, not to develop patches against. For that it would be better to switch to git when you get some time to spend on that.

So, I have created another patch from git repository.
The attached one could be applied to the latest code.

Looking at this patch I cannot but wonder if this should be a table
instead of a plain list.

What's happen if you run the patch command at top of the repository?

[snaga@devwa02 postgresql]$ pwd
/home/snaga/pgsql/repo/postgresql
[snaga@devwa02 postgresql]$ patch -p1 < ../ecpg-git.sgml.diff
patching file doc/src/sgml/ecpg.sgml
[snaga@devwa02 postgresql]$

or

[snaga@devwa02 postgresql]$ git apply --reject ../ecpg-git.sgml.diff
../ecpg-git.sgml.diff:123: trailing whitespace.

Checking patch doc/src/sgml/ecpg.sgml...
Applied patch doc/src/sgml/ecpg.sgml cleanly.
warning: 1 line adds whitespace errors.
[snaga@devwa02 postgresql]$

Sorry I'm not familiar with Git yet, but I think above command can
apply the patch.
(I created the patch with the command `git diff'. Is this correct?)

Thanks,
--
NAGAYASU Satoshi <satoshi.nagayasu@gmail.com>

Excerpts from Satoshi Nagayasu's message of mar sep 28 00:06:19 -0400 2010:

On 2010/09/28 12:40, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

Looking at this patch I cannot but wonder if this should be a table
instead of a plain list.

What's happen if you run the patch command at top of the repository?

Sorry, I didn't try applying it. I don't think there's anything wrong
with the patch per se. I'm just saying that maybe this page needs more
significant SGML markup hacking.

--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> writes:

I just made a pass through the wiki cleaning up all of the outdated CVS
related stuff I knew of there that this page was pointing to. It's a
sequential group of 9 changes to revert if we're forsaken and somehow
this conversion stops. Main thing left with obsolete info is
http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/cvs.html

Hrm, that page shouldn't even exist anymore. Peter?

regards, tom lane

On 2010/09/28 14:08, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

Excerpts from Satoshi Nagayasu's message of mar sep 28 00:06:19 -0400 2010:

On 2010/09/28 12:40, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

Looking at this patch I cannot but wonder if this should be a table
instead of a plain list.

What's happen if you run the patch command at top of the repository?

Sorry, I didn't try applying it. I don't think there's anything wrong
with the patch per se. I'm just saying that maybe this page needs more
significant SGML markup hacking.

I see. Yes, at first, I thought it, too.

However, at this time, I think SGML hack is not necessary right now,
because the important thing is to fix several missing definitions,

So, I want to hear from others on this issue before starting SGML hack
(such as "create a table instead of a list").
If markup hack is necessary for this time, I'm ready to go.

Thanks,
--
NAGAYASU Satoshi <satoshi.nagayasu@gmail.com>

On tis, 2010-09-28 at 02:46 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:

Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> writes:

I just made a pass through the wiki cleaning up all of the outdated CVS
related stuff I knew of there that this page was pointing to. It's a
sequential group of 9 changes to revert if we're forsaken and somehow
this conversion stops. Main thing left with obsolete info is
http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/cvs.html

Hrm, that page shouldn't even exist anymore. Peter?

I've changed the doc build to use rsync so that orphaned files get
deleted.

On tis, 2010-09-28 at 11:38 +0900, Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:

On 2010/09/28 10:31, Greg Smith wrote:

If the patch you generated applies to the git version of the repo cleanly, you may be fine for now. The anon-cvs version is mainly intended as a source to get a copy of the source code just to compile or read, not to develop patches against. For that it would be better to switch to git when you get some time to spend on that.

So, I have created another patch from git repository.
The attached one could be applied to the latest code.

Committed, with some adjustments. Notably, you probably misinterpreted
the meaning of the -600 error code from the comment in header file.
Also, the -600 and -601 codes are not generated by the current code at
all, so I have commented them out in the documentation.