| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <akapila(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql: Raise a warning if there is a possibility of data from multiple |
| Date: | 2022-09-09 02:34:32 |
| Message-ID: | 1819.1662690872@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers |
Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Fair enough. Do you mind being consistent in this regard for logical
> replication-related code?
As long as not too many individual changes are involved, sure.
But consistency of this sort doesn't seem worth creating a lot
of back-patching land mines, IMO.
> BTW, is there a reason we prefer to write in
> one or another way (with or without appending schema_name)?
In places where we can trust the search_path to be just pg_catalog,
there's no real strong reason to write a schema name, I think.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John Naylor | 2022-09-09 04:46:59 | pgsql: Add jsonpath_gram.h to list of distprep targets |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2022-09-09 01:53:51 | pgsql: Replace load of functions by direct calls for some WIN32 |