From: | Sutou Kouhei <kou(at)clear-code(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com |
Cc: | zhjwpku(at)gmail(dot)com, andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net, michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz, sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com, nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations |
Date: | 2023-12-15 02:55:18 |
Message-ID: | 20231215.115518.402165846487638860.kou@clear-code.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
In
<OS3PR01MB9882F023300EDC5AFD8A8339F58EA(at)OS3PR01MB9882(dot)jpnprd01(dot)prod(dot)outlook(dot)com>
"RE: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations" on Tue, 12 Dec 2023 02:31:53 +0000,
"Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
>> Can we discuss how to proceed this improvement?
>>
>> There are 2 approaches for it:
>>
>> 1. Do the followings concurrently:
>> a. Implementing small changes that got a consensus and
>> merge them step-by-step
>> (e.g. We got a consensus that we need to extract the
>> current format related routines.)
>> b. Discuss design
>>
>> (v1-v3 patches use this approach.)
>>
>> 2. Implement one (large) complete patch set with design
>> discussion and merge it
>>
>> (v4- patches use this approach.)
>>
>> Which approach is preferred? (Or should we choose another
>> approach?)
>>
>> I thought that 1. is preferred because it will reduce review
>> cost. So I chose 1.
>
> I'm ok to use approach 1, but could you please divide a large patch? E.g.,
>
> 0001. defines an infrastructure for copy-API
> 0002. adjusts current codes to use APIs
> 0003. adds a test module in src/test/modules or contrib.
> ...
>
> This approach helps reviewers to see patches deeper. Separated patches can be
> combined when they are close to committable.
It seems that I should have chosen another approach based on
comments so far:
3. Do the followings in order:
a. Implement a workable (but maybe dirty and/or incomplete)
implementation to discuss design like [1], discuss
design with it and get a consensus on design
b. Implement small patches based on the design
I'll implement a custom COPY FORMAT handler with [1] and
provide a feedback with the experience. (It's for a.)
Thanks,
--
kou
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Junwang Zhao | 2023-12-15 03:27:30 | Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2023-12-15 02:33:14 | Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences, take 2 |