Horton

Re: Re: pg_stat_statements normalisation without invasive changes to the parser (was: Next steps on pg_stat_statements normalisation)

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

View thread
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2012-03-02T20:13:02Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Restructure SELECT INTO's parsetree representation into CreateTableAsStmt.

  2. Extend the parser location infrastructure to include a location field in

  3. Teach eval_const_expressions() to simplify an ArrayCoerceExpr to a constant

Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> This is exactly why I'm not keen on checksums for 9.2.  We've reached
> the point where the attention on the checksum patch is pushing aside
> other patches which are more ready and have had more work.

IMO the reason why it's sucking so much attention is precisely that it's
not close to being ready to commit.  But this is well off topic for the
thread we're on.  If you want to propose booting checksums from
consideration for 9.2, let's have that discussion on the checksum
thread.

			regards, tom lane