[mapserver-dev] Re: postgis transaction patch (WAS: Voluminous Bug List)

[Paul Ramsey]

David,

If I have time to set up a proper testing environment I'll look at it,
but you'll probably get to it first. The logic of
msPOSTGISInitConnection seems pretty unassailable. I would suggest
throwing in some tests for the "impossible" cases of PQTRANS_ACTIVE,
and PQTRANS_UNKNOWN, and perhaps a logging message for
PGTRANS_INTRANS, just to improve visibility of what's going on.

There is one piece of code you didn't retrofit, search for a *lower
case* "begin" to find it. However, it's in a code path that should
never get hit, so I don't think that's it.

All this tap dancing re-inforces to me the need to do a
clean-up/re-write of this stuff to *not* use binary cursors anymore.
We should be doing base64 encoding of WKB for transit so we can avoid
the whole binary cursor (and associated BEGIN/END/ROLLBACK) mess.
Mildly slower, but way cleaner code.

P.

On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 2:30 PM, David Fuhry <dfuhry at acm.org> wrote:
> Paul,
>
>    The mappostgis.c patch is apparently still not completely correct yet;
> see Carlos Molina's recent messages:
>
>  http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/mapserver-users/2008-March/055050.html
>  http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/mapserver-users/2008-March/055072.html
>
>  and my response:
>
>  http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/mapserver-users/2008-April/055264.html
>
>    I won't be able to look at this in earnest until after next Monday, but
> if you can give the patch a brief review, that would be appreciated.
> Especially if you happen across the cause of the error that Carlos is
> seeing.
>
>  Thanks,
>
>  Dave
>
>
>  Steve Lime wrote:
>
> > I always focus on the milestone reports which are generally more
> encouraging. ;-) I would welcome
> > an additional set of eyes working through the backlog, so please feel
> free. I took care of 1440 just now.
> >
> > While I've got you, one that could use your approval is 2497. There's a
> patch attached that seems to
> > help but I'd prefer to have someone familiar with PostGIS internals weight
> in before applying.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > On 4/8/2008 at 3:01 PM, in message
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > <30fe546d0804081301tf7bece0k4757283b559da29f at mail.gmail.com>, "Paul
> Ramsey"
> > <pramsey at cleverelephant.ca> wrote:
> >
> > > Has anyone noticed that the list of Mapserver bugs is Really Long?
> > >
> > > http://trac.osgeo.org/mapserver/report/1
> > > It also includes stuff like this:
> > >
> > > http://trac.osgeo.org/mapserver/ticket/1440
> > > An issue from three years ago, that had a patch attached, and the
> > > patch was applied and... the ticket is still open.
> > >
> > > Would a little gentle janitorial work through the issues be
> > > appreciated or unwelcome? For the above example, turning it to fixed,
> > > noting the patch was applied at 4.7 and that 4.6 is too old to think
> > > about.
> > >
> > > I could do a few of these now and again, keep the volume low, and if I
> > > make an error, hopefully since the relevant developers will be
> > > notified, they will catch it and smack me.
> > >
> > > ?
> > >
> > > P.
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > mapserver-dev mailing list
> > > mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mapserver-dev mailing list
> > mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev
> >
>