| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Melih Mutlu <m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Do we still need parent column in pg_backend_memory_context? |
| Date: | 2024-07-31 01:27:06 |
| Message-ID: | 3285934.1722389226@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I feel the bar is a bit lower for pg_backend_memory_contexts as it was
> only added in v14, so it's not been around as long as pg_class had
> been around in 2018 when we removed relhaspkey.
Yeah, and also it's very much a developer-focused view with a limited
audience. It's certainly possible that we could remove the column
and nobody would complain. I just wanted to point out that there is
a compatibility worry here.
> One thing we could do is remove it and see if anyone complains. If we
> did that today, there's about a year-long window for people to
> complain where we could still reverse the decision.
Seems like a plausible compromise.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2024-07-31 01:46:51 | Re: Popcount optimization using AVX512 |
| Previous Message | wenhui qiu | 2024-07-31 01:21:17 | Re: Can we rely on the ordering of paths in pathlist? |