Horton

Re: Re: proposal: schema variables

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>

View thread
From: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>, jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>, Erik Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, DUVAL REMI <REMI.DUVAL@cheops.fr>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-01-17T14:47:28Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers, pgsql-performance

Commits

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

  1. Move WAL sequence code into its own file

  2. Add ExplainState argument to pg_plan_query() and planner().

  3. Don't include access/htup_details.h in executor/tuptable.h

  4. Refactor to avoid code duplication in transformPLAssignStmt.

  5. Avoid including commands/dbcommands.h in so many places

  6. Restrict psql meta-commands in plain-text dumps.

  7. Split func.sgml into more manageable pieces

  8. Fix squashing algorithm for query texts

  9. EXPLAIN: Always use two fractional digits for row counts.

  10. Preliminary refactoring of plpgsql expression construction.

  11. plpgsql: pure parser and reentrant scanner

  12. Add some sanity checks in executor for query ID reporting

  13. Fix misleading error message context

  14. Add macros for looping through a List without a ListCell.

On 2025-Jan-17, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Is this really something we are considering applying, since it has been
> around for years?  I am unclear on that and we had better know if we are
> going to continue reviewing this.

The fact that the patch has been around for years doesn't automatically
mean it's a bad idea.

I have proposed that we discuss this patch at fosdem developer's meeting
next month, precisely to seek consensus on whether this patch is
something we want or not.  My view is that this is a feature that has
been requested by users for years, so IMO we want this or something
similar.

I wonder if the reason that committers stay away from it is that
reviewing it fully (and thus taking responsibility for it) seems such a
daunting task.  I might be wrong, but I think this may be the largest
patch since FTS.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera               48°01'N 7°57'E  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
Tom: There seems to be something broken here.
Teodor: I'm in sackcloth and ashes...  Fixed.
                               http://postgr.es/m/482D1632.8010507@sigaev.ru