Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qCerW-0000gG-HC for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2023 11:21:58 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qCerV-0002xz-71 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2023 11:21:57 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qCerU-0002xp-Tp for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2023 11:21:56 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qCerR-004Ciu-SA for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2023 11:21:56 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 35NBLk63015383; Fri, 23 Jun 2023 07:21:46 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Tommy Pavlicek cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Dagfinn_Ilmari_Manns=C3=A5ker?= , pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Tomas Vondra Subject: Re: [PATCH] Extend ALTER OPERATOR to support adding commutator, negator, hashes, and merges In-reply-to: References: <4077062.1687452468@sss.pgh.pa.us> <87r0q3qvxd.fsf@wibble.ilmari.org> <4082750.1687455374@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Tommy Pavlicek message dated "Fri, 23 Jun 2023 12:34:38 +0200" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <15381.1687519306.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2023 07:21:46 -0400 Message-ID: <15382.1687519306@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Tommy Pavlicek writes: > I've added a single patch here: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/43/4389/ > It wasn't obvious whether I should create a second commitfest entry > because I've included 2 patches so I've just done 1 to begin with. On > that note, is it preferred here to split patches of this size into > separate patches, and if so, additionally, separate threads? No, our commitfest infrastructure is unable to deal with patches that have interdependencies unless they're presented in a single email. So just use one thread, and be sure to attach all the patches each time. (BTW, while you seem to have gotten away with it so far, it's usually advisable to name the patch files like 0001-foo.patch, 0002-bar.patch, etc, to make sure the cfbot understands what order to apply them in.) regards, tom lane