Horton

Re: proposal: schema variables

Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
To: Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>
Cc: 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: 2024-11-10T18:04:34Z
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.

ne 10. 11. 2024 v 18:41 odesílatel Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>
napsal:

> > On Sun, Nov 10, 2024 at 05:19:09PM GMT, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > ne 10. 11. 2024 v 16:24 odesílatel Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>
> > napsal:
> >
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > Thanks for continuing this work. As a side note, I would like to
> mention
> > > how strange the situation in this CF item is. If I understand
> correctly,
> > > there are two hackers threads discussing the same patch, with recent
> > > patches posted in both of them. This is obviously confusing, e.g. the
> > > main concern from another thread, about names clashing, wasn't even
> > > mentioned in this one. Is it possible to reconcile development in one
> > > thread?
> > >
> >
> > This is probably my error. I don't try to organize threads, just I'll try
> > to reply in the thread where I got a question.
>
> It's fine. I just would appreciate some clarity about which patch to
> look at. To confirm, the series in this thread contains everything from
> the other one, plus some improvements, right?
>

I don't remember any change that can be visible for users in this thread.
Laurens does very precious code review (thank you again) - there are bigger
changes in comments, and less changes in code - some parts of code are
moved between patches, some lines were redundant and removed, some lines
were artefacts of some git work and were cleaned. Some redundant tests were
removed. There is no new code.

Regards

Pavel