Message-ID: <026fc15f-e4f4-ae65-e314-1c59c9b69928@cmatte.me>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2023 17:49:05 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.8.0
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] pgarchives: merge schema.sql into Django's model
Content-Language: en-US
To: pgsql-www@lists.postgresql.org
References: <12eb75f0-3fc2-14f3-0931-4f29e145f182@cmatte.me>
 <adbc1f36-2f28-1f5f-b293-593c0272b963@cmatte.me>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?C=c3=a9lestin_Matte?= <celestin.matte@cmatte.me>
In-Reply-To: <adbc1f36-2f28-1f5f-b293-593c0272b963@cmatte.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/026fc15f-e4f4-ae65-e314-1c59c9b69928%40cmatte.me>
Precedence: bulk

Hello,

I sent these patches over a year ago. Can they be reviewed?
Patches I sent earlier were rejected because a full merge of the database creation process was a better approach. This series of patches does exactly that.

On 07/05/2022 11:32, Célestin Matte wrote:
> Hi there,
> 
> Gentle reminder that this patch has not been reviewed and may have been forgotten
> 
> On 03/02/2022 14:30, Célestin Matte wrote:
>> As discussed in previous threads before [1, 2], database creations file are currently split between the Django model and a SQL file. Discrepancy in the database's definition exists between them. As a consequence, the database cannot be created easily.
>> This series of patches merge schema.sql into Django's model, and adds specific postgres components that cannot be handled by Django's ORM using RunSQL() in a migration file.
>>
>> Please also note that I integrated several other patches to avoid multiple migration files:
>> - I allowed message.parentid to be null, as discussed in [1]. This can cause Internal Server Errors in views.py, which are fixed by the second patch.
>> - I used BinaryFields for bytea columns (message.rawtxt and attachments.attachment), which seems to be the way to integrate bytea into Django
>>
>> It may be a good opportunity to remove all mentions of pg_dict, pg_stop and associated file. I'm not sure of the consequences of this. According to [2], these are the remains of an aborted idea.
>> Also, what does tsparer bring? Can the installation of pgarchives be simplified by replacing it with pg_catalog.english?
>>
>>
>> [1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABUevEyFpYPEHh0AAyTAsgymRKOOVA1SY_pDHPCbBQQ9BawfTA%40mail.gmail.com
>> [2]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABUevEy_i1xAKscMv4KZ0%3DbE8050bBcQfWaNyjwZZBofZx7JgQ%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> 

-- 
Célestin Matte