Re: [PATCH] New [relation] option engine
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Nikolay Shaplov <dhyan@nataraj.su>
Cc: Yura Sokolov <y.sokolov@postgrespro.ru>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Date: 2023-12-08T12:59:09Z
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 →
-
Tighten test_predtest's input checks, and improve error messages.
- 00ac25a3c365 17.0 cited
-
Avoid reference to nonexistent array element in ExecInitAgg().
- 92957ed98c5c 16.0 cited
-
Clean up newlines following left parentheses
- c4f113e8fef9 15.0 cited
On 2023-Dec-08, Nikolay Shaplov wrote: > Theoretically I can create patch with full options.c as it is in the patch > now, and use that code only in index AM, and keep reloption.c mostly > unchanged. > > This will be total mess with two different options mechanisms working in the > same time, but this might be much more easy to review. When we are done with > the first step, we can change the rest. > If this will help to finally include patch into postgres, I can do it. Will > that help you to review? I don't think that's better, because we could create slight inconsistencies between the code used for index AMs and the users of reloptions. I'm not seeing any reasonable way to split this patch in smaller ones. -- Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ "No necesitamos banderas No reconocemos fronteras" (Jorge González)