Re: Command Triggers, patch v11
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndquadrant.fr>
Date: 2012-03-19T01:16:26Z
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 →
-
Fix SPGiST vacuum algorithm to handle concurrent tuple motion properly.
- b4af1c25bbc6 9.2.0 cited
-
Remove useless const qualifier
- 66f0cf7da8ee 9.2.0 cited
-
Make executor's SELECT INTO code save and restore original tuple receiver.
- dfd26f9c5f37 9.2.0 cited
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: > On lr, 2012-03-17 at 18:04 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> I'm not sure what we should do instead. We have gotten push-back before >> anytime we changed the command tag for an existing command (and in fact >> it seems that we intentionally added the rowcount display in 9.0, which >> means there are people out there who care about that functionality). >> On the other hand, the traditional output for CREATE TABLE AS doesn't >> seem to satisfy the principle of least astonishment. A third >> consideration is that if we are pushing CREATE TABLE AS as the preferred >> spelling, people will probably complain if it omits functionality that >> SELECT INTO provides; so I'm not sure that "SELECT n" in one case and >> "CREATE TABLE AS" in the other would be a good idea either. Any >> opinions what to do here? > Another consideration is that the SQL command tags are defined by the > SQL standard. So if we were to change it, then it should be "CREATE > TABLE". I'm not convinced that it should be changed, though. (I recall > cross-checking our list against the SQL standard in the past, so there > might have been discussion on this already.) If we were going to change the output at all, I would vote for "CREATE TABLE nnnn" so as to preserve the rowcount functionality. Keep in mind though that this would force client-side changes, for instance in libpq's PQcmdTuples(). Fixing that one routine isn't so painful, but what of other client-side libraries, not to mention applications? regards, tom lane