Re: proposal: schema variables

Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>

From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>

To: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>

Cc: 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: 2024-11-02T05:46:12Z

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 →

Move WAL sequence code into its own file
- a87987cafca6 19 (unreleased) cited
Add ExplainState argument to pg_plan_query() and planner().
- c83ac02ec730 19 (unreleased) cited
Don't include access/htup_details.h in executor/tuptable.h
- 1a8b5b11e48a 19 (unreleased) cited
Refactor to avoid code duplication in transformPLAssignStmt.
- b0fb2c6aa5a4 19 (unreleased) cited
Avoid including commands/dbcommands.h in so many places
- 325fc0ab14d1 19 (unreleased) cited
Restrict psql meta-commands in plain-text dumps.
- 71ea0d679543 19 (unreleased) cited
Split func.sgml into more manageable pieces
- 4e23c9ef65ac 19 (unreleased) cited
Fix squashing algorithm for query texts
- 0f65f3eec478 18.0 cited
EXPLAIN: Always use two fractional digits for row counts.
- 95dbd827f2ed 18.0 cited
Preliminary refactoring of plpgsql expression construction.
- a654af21ae52 18.0 cited
plpgsql: pure parser and reentrant scanner
- 7b27f5fd36cb 18.0 cited
Add some sanity checks in executor for query ID reporting
- 24f520594809 18.0 cited
Fix misleading error message context
- 4af123ad45bd 18.0 cited
Add macros for looping through a List without a ListCell.
- 14dd0f27d7cd 17.0 cited

On Tue, 2024-10-29 at 08:16 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> again, necessary rebase

I have started looking at patch 5, and I have some questions and comments.

- The commit message is headed "memory cleaning after DROP VARIABLE", but
  the rest of the commit message speaks of sinval messages.  These two
  things are independent, aren't they?  And both lead to the need to validate
  the variables, right?

  Then this code comment would for example be wrong:

     /* true after accepted sinval message */
     static bool needs_validation = false;

  It also becomes "true" after DROP VARIABLE, right?
  I am happy to fix the comment, but I want to understand the patch first.

- I see that the patch adds cleanup of invalid session variable to each
  COMMIT.  Is that a good idea?  I'd expect that it is good enough to clean
  up whenever session variables are accessed.
  Calling remove_invalid_session_variables() during each COMMIT will affect
  all transactions, and I don't see the benefit.

  Also, do we need to call it during pg_session_variables()?

Yours,
Laurenz Albe