Use of database column 'user' fails on PostgreSQL #13
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
qadan
changed the title
IAMlKeno
approved these changes
Jun 11, 2020
|
Superseded by #15 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Having some trouble getting this up and running on a box using PostgreSQL instead of MySQL; the use of
useras a column name trips things up since this is a reserved word.Actually, it seems to be a reserved word in MySQL as well, just that MySQL appears to not care for whatever reason ... probably not ideal behaviour out of it, but that's neither here nor there :/
Given that avoidance of reserved words is part of coding standards anyhow, changing this would seem necessary.
This PR includes the change to the column name and usages to
uid, which seems more the standard, as well as an update hook to migrate existing logs over.