| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar(dot)raghuwanshi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Expression errors with "FOR UPDATE" and postgres_fdw with partition wise join enabled. |
| Date: | 2018-08-01 17:44:07 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZqQF1irUvkbd6+bxdRCMa8H=gpy-7=YUxQDmvWP37sOw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 7:46 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> I posted the updated patch [1].
Etsuro-san:
I really think we should just go with what Ashutosh had proposed.
Tom, Ashutosh, and I all seem to agree that we shouldn't try to
re-jigger things at create-plan time. I think that a 3-1 consensus
against your proposal is sufficient to say we shouldn't go that way.
Now, here you've got a new approach which avoids that, which I have
not yet reviewed. I'll try to spend some time on it this afternoon,
but really, I think it's too late for this. This bug was reported in
February, and we're supposed to be pushing 11 final out the door in
not much more than a month. Proposing a new approach in August is not
good. Can't we just do what Ashutosh proposed for now and revisit
this for v12?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shawn Debnath | 2018-08-01 17:58:03 | Re: [Patch] Checksums for SLRU files |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2018-08-01 17:43:24 | Re: Online enabling of checksums |