Horton

Re: Centralizing protective copying of utility statements

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2021-06-17T20:50:57Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2021-06-17 15:53:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Uh, nobody ever promised that server-internal APIs are frozen as of beta1;
>> that would be a horrid crimp on our ability to fix bugs during beta.

> Sure, there's no promise. But I still think it's worth taking the amount
> of breakage more into account than pre beta?

Are there really so many people using the ProcessUtility hook?
In a quick look on codesearch.debian.net, I found

hypopg
pgaudit
pgextwlist
pglogical

which admittedly is more than none, but it's not a huge number
either.  I have to think that fixing this bug reliably is a
more important consideration.

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. Avoid scribbling on input node tree in CREATE/ALTER DOMAIN.

  2. Centralize the logic for protective copying of utility statements.