As of d9dd406fe2, we require MSVC 2013,
which means _MSC_VER >= 1800. This means that conditionals about
older versions of _MSC_VER can be removed or simplified.
Previous code was also in some cases handling MinGW, where _MSC_VER is
not defined at all, incorrectly, such as in pg_ctl.c and win32_port.h,
leading to some compiler warnings. This should now be handled better.
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
This reverts commit bd7c95f0c1,
along with assorted follow-on fixes. There are some questions
about the definition and implementation of that statement, and
we don't have time to resolve them before v13 release. Rather
than ship the feature and then have backwards-compatibility
concerns constraining any redesign, let's remove it for now
and try again later.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/TY2PR01MB2443EC8286995378AEB7D9F8F5B10@TY2PR01MB2443.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
DECLARE STATEMENT is a statement that lets users declare an identifier
pointing at a connection. This identifier will be used in other embedded
dynamic SQL statement such as PREPARE, EXECUTE, DECLARE CURSOR and so on.
When connecting to a non-default connection, the AT clause can be used in
a DECLARE STATEMENT once and is no longer needed in every dynamic SQL
statement. This makes ECPG applications easier and more efficient. Moreover,
writing code without designating connection explicitly improves portability.
Authors: Ideriha-san ("Ideriha, Takeshi" <ideriha.takeshi@jp.fujitsu.com>)
Kuroda-san ("Kuroda, Hayato" <kuroda.hayato@jp.fujitsu.com>)
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m4E72940DA2BF16479384A86D54D0988A565669DF@G01JPEXMBKW04
A report from Andrew Dunstan showed that an ecpglib breakage that
causes repeated query failures could lead to infinite loops in some
ecpg test scripts, because they contain "while(1)" loops with no
exit condition other than successful test completion. That might
be all right for manual testing, but it seems entirely unacceptable
for automated test environments such as our buildfarm. We don't
want buildfarm owners to have to intervene manually when a test
goes wrong.
To fix, just change all those while(1) loops to exit after at most
100 iterations (which is more than any of them expect to iterate).
This seems sufficient since we'd see discrepancies in the test output
if any loop executed the wrong number of times.
I tested this by dint of intentionally breaking ecpg_do_prologue
to always fail, and verifying that the tests still got to completion.
Back-patch to all supported branches, since the whole point of this
exercise is to protect the buildfarm against future mistakes.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/18693.1548302004@sss.pgh.pa.us
The parenthesized style has only been used in a few modules. Change
that to use the style that is predominant across the whole tree.
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Ryan Murphy <ryanfmurphy@gmail.com>
nan_test.pgc supposed that it could unconditionally #define isnan()
and isinf() on WIN32. This was evidently copied at some point from
src/include/port/win32.h, but nowadays there's a test on _MSC_VER
there. Make nan_test.pgc look the same.
Per buildfarm warnings. There's no evidence this produces anything
worse than a warning, and besides it's only a test case, so I don't
feel a need to back-patch.
To ensure that "make installcheck" can be used safely against an existing
installation, we need to be careful about what global object names
(database, role, and tablespace names) we use; otherwise we might
accidentally clobber important objects. There's been a weak consensus that
test databases should have names including "regression", and that test role
names should start with "regress_", but we didn't have any particular rule
about tablespace names; and neither of the other rules was followed with
any consistency either.
This commit moves us a long way towards having a hard-and-fast rule that
regression test databases must have names including "regression", and that
test role and tablespace names must start with "regress_". It's not
completely there because I did not touch some test cases in rolenames.sql
that test creation of special role names like "session_user". That will
require some rethinking of exactly what we want to test, whereas the intent
of this patch is just to hit all the cases in which the needed renamings
are cosmetic.
There is no enforcement mechanism in this patch either, but if we don't
add one we can expect that the tests will soon be violating the convention
again. Again, that's not such a cosmetic change and it will require
discussion. (But I did use a quick-hack enforcement patch to find these
cases.)
Discussion: <16638.1468620817@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Peter Eisentraut