Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2020 21:06:03 +0100
From: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Konstantin Knizhnik <k.knizhnik@postgrespro.ru>
Cc: =?utf-8?B?5pu+5paH5peMKOS5ieS7jik=?= <wenjing.zwj@alibaba-inc.com>,
	Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>,
	Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
	=?utf-8?B?6JSh5p2+6ZyyKOWtkOWYiSk=?= <zijia@taobao.com>,
	"Cai, Le" <le.cai@alibaba-inc.com>,
	=?utf-8?B?6JCn5bCR6IGqKOmTgeW6tSk=?= <shaocong.xsc@alibaba-inc.com>
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables
Message-ID: <20200105200603.wrb4beacwb57hhpk@development>
References: <1A1A6EDC-D0EC-47B0-BD21-C2ACBAEA65E4@alibaba-inc.com>
 <0ef6f482-11ce-a99f-207e-26fa3f2f56db@postgrespro.ru>
 <CA+Tgmob_Fg9PfNjjOReJtAE4B5gc8+UqHh+tztJ_C+iRN4KHSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <24099f4e-742c-e92b-729c-77bac1ca80d4@postgrespro.ru>
 <CAFj8pRBo8YZ=bJESqf2fkxGL8Bq2Fs7=SjxisS7UhXHh6yPSfA@mail.gmail.com>
 <80cf30c2-ebd5-a568-9f62-a970e4d91326@postgrespro.ru>
 <5767433E-1A77-4682-B3FD-4869911021C8@alibaba-inc.com>
 <6b7570aa-14ea-2f28-c3b5-74dd785bbafe@postgrespro.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <6b7570aa-14ea-2f28-c3b5-74dd785bbafe@postgrespro.ru>
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

I think we need to do something with having two patches aiming to add
global temporary tables:

[1] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/26/2349/

[2] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/26/2233/

As a reviewer I have no idea which of the threads to look at - certainly
not without reading both threads, which I doubt anyone will really do.
The reviews and discussions are somewhat intermixed between those two
threads, which makes it even more confusing.

I think we should agree on a minimal patch combining the necessary/good
bits from the various patches, and terminate one of the threads (i.e.
mark it as rejected or RWF). And we need to do that now, otherwise
there's about 0% chance of getting this into v13.

In general, I agree with the sentiment Rober expressed in [1] - the
patch needs to be as small as possible, not adding "nice to have"
features (like support for parallel queries - I very much doubt just
using shared instead of local buffers is enough to make it work.)

regards

-- 
Tomas Vondra                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services