| From: | Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Данил Столповских <danil(dot)stolpovskikh(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, o(dot)tselebrovskiy(at)postgrespro(dot)ru, d(dot)frolov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru |
| Subject: | Re: Allow deleting enumerated values from an existing enumerated data type |
| Date: | 2023-10-03 15:49:22 |
| Message-ID: | bd3cb624-974d-3093-905d-31e29b42b683@postgresfriends.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/3/23 17:44, Tom Lane wrote:
> Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org> writes:
>> On 10/2/23 20:07, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
>>> FWIW I'm +1 on this patch,
>
>> Thanks.
>
>>> and with Tom on dropping the "yet". To me it
>>> makes it sound like we intend to implement it soon (fsvo).
>
>> I am not fundamentally opposed to it, nor to any other wordsmithing the
>> committer (probably Tom) wants to do. The main point of the patch is to
>> list at least some of the problems that need to be solved in a correct
>> implementation.
>
> Pushed with a bit more work on the text.
>
> I left out the regression test, as it seems like it'd add test cycles
> to little purpose. It won't do anything to improve the odds that
> someone finds this text.
Thanks!
--
Vik Fearing
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2023-10-03 15:56:08 | Re: Remove IndexInfo.ii_OpclassOptions field |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-10-03 15:44:15 | Re: Allow deleting enumerated values from an existing enumerated data type |