Re: proposal: schema variables

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
Cc: Marcos Pegoraro <marcos@f10.com.br>, 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: 2025-05-20T20:28:01Z
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 Tue, May 20, 2025 at 08:47:36PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > On 20 May 2025, at 18:39, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> > My only point is that we should only be using email lists for work that
> > is being actively worked on to be added to community Postgres.  There
> > has been talk of a trimmed-down version of this being applied, but I
> > don't see any work in that direction.
> > 
> > This patch should be moved to a separate location where perhaps people
> > can subscribe to updates when they are posted, perhaps github.
> 
> As a project with no roadmap governed by open forum consensus I don't think we
> have any right to tell community members what they can or cannot work on here,
> any technical discussion which conforms with our published policies should be
> welcome.  If Pavel want's to continue rebasing his patchset here then he has,
> IMHO, every right to do so.
> 
> Whether or not a committer will show interest at some point is another thing,
> but we are seeing a very good role-model for taking responsibility for ones
> work here at the very least =)

Well, we do have a right, e.g., we would not allow someone to repeatedly
post patches for a Postgres extension we don't manage, or the jdbc
driver.  I also don't think we would allow someone to continue posting
patches for a feature we have decided to reject, and I think we have
decided to reject the patch in in its current form.  I think we might
accept a trimmed-down version, but I don't see the patch moving in that
direction.

Now, of course, if I am the only one who feels this way, I can suppress
these emails on my end.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EDB                                      https://enterprisedb.com

  Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.