getopt_long(). This is more or less the same problem as we saw earlier
with getaddrinfo() and struct addrinfo, and for the same reason: random
user-added libraries might contain the subroutine, but there's no
guarantee we will find the matching header files.
There is an option "-s oldname=newname", which changes the old field name of
the dbf-file to the newname in PostgeSQL. If the length of the new name is 0,
the field is skiped. If you want to skip the first field of the dbf-file,
you get the wildest error-messages from the backend.
dbf2pg load the dbf-file via "COPY tablename FROM STDIN". If you skip the
first field, it is an \t to much in STDIN.
A fix could be an counter j=0, which increments only, if a field is imported
(IF (strlen(fields[h].db_name)> 0) j++. And only if j > 1 (if an other field is
imported) the \t is printed.
An other small bug in the README:
-s start
Specify the first record-number in the xBase-file
we will insert.
should be
-e start
Specify the first record-number in the xBase-file
we will insert.
Thomas Behr
the new timetravel.c,
new timetravel.README (cut from spi/README and modified),
modified timetravel.sql.in
and modified timetravel.example.
Features:
- optionally 3 parameter for insert/update/delete user name
- work with CREATE UNIQUE INDEX ixxx on table xxx
(unique_field,time_off);
(the original version was work with unique index on 6.5.0-6.5.3,
and not work on 7.3.2,7.3.3)
(before 6.5.0 and between 6.5.3 and 7.3.2 I dont know)
- get_timetravel(tablename) function for check timetravel-status.
- timetravel trigger not change oid of the active record. (it is not a
good feature, because the old version is automatice prevent the paralel
update with "where oid=nnn")
B?jthe Zolt?n
>>Sounds like all that's needed for your case. But to be complete, in
>>addition to changing tablefunc.c we'd have to:
>>1) come up with a new function call signature that makes sense and does
>>not cause backward compatibility problems for other people
>>2) make needed changes to tablefunc.sql.in
>>3) adjust the README.tablefunc appropriately
>>4) adjust the regression test for new functionality
>>5) be sure we don't break any of the old cases
>>
>>If you want to submit a complete patch, it would be gratefully accepted
>>-- for review at least ;-)
>
> Here's the patch, at least for steps 1-3
Nabil Sayegh
Joe Conway
