Re: pgsql: Don't Memoize lateral joins with volatile join conditions

From: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: David Rowley <drowley(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Don't Memoize lateral joins with volatile join conditions
Date: 2023-08-07 21:56:41
Message-ID: CAApHDvoB6i1oC3hSvDGBu7UF=YZR1Cy6Ebwo7skcCPwZQFZV3Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers

On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 at 01:02, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> David Rowley <drowley(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> > Don't Memoize lateral joins with volatile join conditions
>
> Is this really something to be pushing into stable branches less than
> 12 hours before a release wrap? We don't normally take such risks
> for anything but security patches, which this isn't. There will not,
> for example, be time for full buildfarm coverage.

My apologies. I had been under the impression that the go-no window
was between stamp and tag and *that* was the window that was used for
a buildfarm cycle. It sounds like it's not quite as black and white as
that. I'm not aware of any documentation which gives guidance on
this.

I'm only aware of:
* https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Release_process
* https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Committing_checklist

Is there somewhere else I should look? or is this something that can
maybe be improved?

(I'm assuming backing the patch out now won't improve the situation,
but please correct me if you think I'm wrong on that)

Thanks

David

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2023-08-07 22:06:51 Re: pgsql: Don't Memoize lateral joins with volatile join conditions
Previous Message Tom Lane 2023-08-07 20:16:11 pgsql: Stamp 11.21.