| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
sort order down into planner, instead of handling it only at the very top
level of the planner. This fixes many things. An explicit sort is now
avoided if there is a cheaper alternative (typically an indexscan) not
only for ORDER BY, but also for the internal sort of GROUP BY. It works
even when there is no other reason (such as a WHERE condition) to consider
the indexscan. It works for indexes on functions. It works for indexes
on functions, backwards. It's just so cool...
CAUTION: I have changed the representation of SortClause nodes, therefore
THIS UPDATE BREAKS STORED RULES. You will need to initdb.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Jan
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Jan
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
pg_rules to rules regression test.
Jan
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
in Resdom and GroupClause so changing of resno's doesn't confuse
the grouping any more.
Jan
|
| |
|
|
| |
real affect now.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
been applied. The patches are in the .tar.gz attachment at the end:
varchar-array.patch this patch adds support for arrays of bpchar() and
varchar(), which where always missing from postgres.
These datatypes can be used to replace the _char4,
_char8, etc., which were dropped some time ago.
block-size.patch this patch fixes many errors in the parser and other
program which happen with very large query statements
(> 8K) when using a page size larger than 8192.
This patch is needed if you want to submit queries
larger than 8K. Postgres supports tuples up to 32K
but you can't insert them because you can't submit
queries larger than 8K. My patch fixes this problem.
The patch also replaces all the occurrences of `8192'
and `1<<13' in the sources with the proper constants
defined in include files. You should now never find
8192 hardwired in C code, just to make code clearer.
--
Massimo Dal Zotto
|
| |
|
|
| |
Jan
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
fixes, enhancements and some found bugs not yet fixed. After
all I was able to get useful results when dumping/reloading
the regression database.
Jan
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
for against a just updated CVS tree. It contains
Partial new rewrite system that handles subselects, view
aggregate columns, insert into select from view, updates
with set col = view-value and select rules restriction to
view definition.
Updates for rule/view backparsing utility functions to
handle subselects correct.
New system views pg_tables and pg_indexes (where you can
see the complete index definition in the latter one).
Enabling array references on query parameters.
Bugfix for functional index.
Little changes to system views pg_rules and pg_views.
The rule system isn't a release-stopper any longer.
But another stopper is that I don't know if the latest
changes to PL/pgSQL (not already in CVS) made it compile on
AIX. Still wait for some response from Dave.
Jan
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|
|
patch is applied:
Rewrite rules on relation level work fine now.
Event qualifications on insert/update/delete rules work
fine now.
I added the new keyword OLD to reference the CURRENT
tuple. CURRENT will be removed in 6.5.
Update rules can reference NEW and OLD in the rule
qualification and the actions.
Insert/update/delete rules on views can be established to
let them behave like real tables.
For insert/update/delete rules multiple actions are
supported now. The actions can also be surrounded by
parantheses to make psql happy. Multiple actions are
required if update to a view requires updates to multiple
tables.
Regular users are permitted to create/drop rules on
tables they have RULE permissions for
(DefineQueryRewrite() is now able to get around the
access restrictions on pg_rewrite). This enables view
creation for regular users too. This required an extra
boolean parameter to pg_parse_and_plan() that tells to
set skipAcl on all rangetable entries of the resulting
queries. There is a new function
pg_exec_query_acl_override() that could be used by
backend utilities to use this facility.
All rule actions (not only views) inherit the permissions
of the event relations owner. Sample: User A creates
tables T1 and T2, creates rules that log
INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE on T1 in T2 (like in the regression
tests for rules I created) and grants ALL but RULE on T1
to user B. User B can now fully access T1 and the
logging happens in T2. But user B cannot access T2 at
all, only the rule actions can. And due to missing RULE
permissions on T1, user B cannot disable logging.
Rules on the attribute level are disabled (they don't
work properly and since regular users are now permitted
to create rules I decided to disable them).
Rules on select must have exactly one action that is a
select (so select rules must be a view definition).
UPDATE NEW/OLD rules are disabled (still broken, but
triggers can do it).
There are two new system views (pg_rule and pg_view) that
show the definition of the rules or views so the db admin
can see what the users do. They use two new functions
pg_get_ruledef() and pg_get_viewdef() that are builtins.
The functions pg_get_ruledef() and pg_get_viewdef() could
be used to implement rule and view support in pg_dump.
PostgreSQL is now the only database system I know, that
has rewrite rules on the query level. All others (where I
found a rule statement at all) use stored database
procedures or the like (triggers as we call them) for
active rules (as some call them).
Future of the rule system:
The now disabled parts of the rule system (attribute
level, multiple actions on select and update new stuff)
require a complete new rewrite handler from scratch. The
old one is too badly wired up.
After 6.4 I'll start to work on a new rewrite handler,
that fully supports the attribute level rules, multiple
actions on select and update new. This will be available
for 6.5 so we get full rewrite rule capabilities.
Jan
|
