Re: Re: proposal: schema variables

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Cc: Marcos Pegoraro <marcos@f10.com.br>, 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: 2025-05-20T21:10:09Z
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 10:28:31PM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> út 20. 5. 2025 v 18:39 odesílatel Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> napsal:
> I sent a reduced version a few months ago - from 21 patches to 8 (and it can be
> reduced to six if we postpone tools for detection ambiguity).
> The timing was not perfect - the focus was and it is concentrated to finish
> pg18.

It was not clear to me that this patch set was being reduced to make it
more likely it would be accepted?  I thought it was the same patch set
since 20??.

> I am very sorry if this topic and patches bother anyone. I am afraid if I close
> it to some personal github, it will not be visible, and I am sure this
> feature is missing in Postgres. Today we have few workarounds. Some workarounds
> are not available everywhere, some workarounds cannot
> be used for security. With integrated solutions some scenarios can be done more
> easily, more secure, faster, more comfortable.  It is true, so
> mentioned scenarios are not "hot" today. Stored procedures or RLS or migration
> procedures from other databases are not extra common. But
> who uses it, then he misses session variables.

Understood.  If people feel it is progressing toward acceptance, I
certainly withdraw my objection and apologize.

-- 
  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.