Re: Fwd: Re: proposal: schema variables
Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>
Commits
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 Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 11:01:41AM GMT, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 04:55:07PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > pá 17. 1. 2025 v 16:35 odesílatel Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> napsal: > > > > So this feature would be like global GUC variables, with permission > > control? > > > > + types and domain type check - holds data in binary form - there are not > > conversions binary, text > > + it is declared - so less space for misuse is there. Custom GUC are absolutely > > tolerant > > + it is a fully database object, only owner can alter it, and event triggers > > are supported, sinval > > + possibility to set mutability, default value > > Okay, good summary. Now, can people give feedback that they would want > this committed to PostgreSQL? +1 into the bucket "want committed" from me as well. Throughout the review process I've stumbled upon a few cases in my own projects, where it would be useful.