From: | "Gregory Stark (as CFM)" <stark(dot)cfm(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: Eliminating SPI from RI triggers - take 2 |
Date: | 2023-03-20 18:53:57 |
Message-ID: | CAM-w4HPsDgchraH1KZVB1vteHCzW8Kjjx6RPefy=vFqqBHR=aA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 17 Oct 2022 at 14:59, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 1:47 AM Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> But I think the bigger problem for this patch set is that the
> design-level feedback from
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BTgmoaiTNj4DgQy42OT9JmTTP1NWcMV%2Bke0i%3D%2Ba7%3DVgnzqGXw%40mail.gmail.com
> hasn't really been addressed, AFAICS. ri_LookupKeyInPkRelPlanIsValid
> is still trivial in v7, and that still seems wrong to me. And I still
> don't know how we're going to avoid changing the semantics in ways
> that are undesirable, or even knowing precisely what we did change. If
> we don't have answers to those questions, then I suspect that this
> patch set isn't going anywhere.
Amit, do you plan to work on this patch for this commitfest (and
therefore this release?). And do you think it has a realistic chance
of being ready for commit this month?
It looks to me like you have some good feedback and can progress and
are unlikely to finish this patch for this release. In which case
maybe we can move it forward to the next release?
--
Gregory Stark
As Commitfest Manager
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2023-03-20 19:09:08 | Re: Request for comment on setting binary format output per session |
Previous Message | Gregory Stark (as CFM) | 2023-03-20 18:47:24 | Re: doc: add missing "id" attributes to extension packaging page |