Re: PERIOD foreign key feature

From: Paul Jungwirth <pj(at)illuminatedcomputing(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PERIOD foreign key feature
Date: 2024-05-09 03:47:45
Message-ID: 04938501-fc8f-46f3-97a4-9a81a3f24530@illuminatedcomputing.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 5/8/24 07:44, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 02:29:34PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>> Yes, David is correct here on all points. I like his suggestion to
>>> clarify the language here also. If you need a patch from me let me know,
>>> but I assume it's something a committer can just make happen?
>>
>> In principle yes, but it's also very helpful if someone produces an actual
>> patch file, with complete commit message, credits, mailing list link, etc.
>
> I am ready to do the work, but waited a day for Peter to reply, since he
> was the author of the text.

Here is a patch for this.

Yours,

--
Paul ~{:-)
pj(at)illuminatedcomputing(dot)com

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-Reword-docs-for-temporal-PKs-with-implicit-referent.patch text/x-patch 2.1 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Lakhin 2024-05-09 04:00:01 Non-systematic handling of EINTR/EAGAIN/EWOULDBLOCK
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2024-05-09 03:46:36 pgsql: Fix overread in JSON parsing errors for incomplete byte sequence