From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
cc: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>,
        Corey Huinker <corey.huinker@gmail.com>,
        Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
        Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>,
        Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
        Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru>,
        PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Error-safe user functions
In-reply-to: <1d17177a-08eb-f1f1-d870-f47a1763f351@dunslane.net>
References: <20221205174231.6wpmbuxafnfzlbuh@alvherre.pgsql>
 <85e40849-4458-bbb9-62ee-d9e7faf0c7dc@dunslane.net>
 <3323802.1670263204@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3496391.1670276406@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20221205234734.sab3fuxy6q2sokjd@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <3518534.1670285891@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20221206005607.lxcrazckoalptwds@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <3523582.1670288815@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <40ff1ed1-4245-e343-bffa-c7755b031492@dunslane.net>
 <CADkLM=coVJ0Hy-yYtXbN_dhfc453zs_BUTTPHmJqv12Urkd79g@mail.gmail.com>
 <3889877.1670358069@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <a6e7ac7e-30ec-5c9d-5134-16072aefc0d7@dunslane.net>
 <4009543.1670422833@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <6acddf68-7cb7-e9e7-a5a7-0abc87b3c55b@dunslane.net>
 <CAKFQuwYdQqQru9tpMpY4JpCEJ8OeN8kwmBG6DY2QyzE+5znA6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <4111458.1670444176@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3211.1670452341@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <1d17177a-08eb-f1f1-d870-f47a1763f351@dunslane.net>
Comments: In-reply-to Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
	message dated "Wed, 07 Dec 2022 17:50:34 -0500"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <5738.1670453780.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2022 17:56:20 -0500
Message-ID: <5739.1670453780@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5739.1670453780%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> On 2022-12-07 We 17:32, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Does it make sense to break 0003 into 4 separate commits, or is
>> that overkill?)

> No strong opinion about 0001 and 0002. I'm happy enough with them as
> they are, but if you want to squash them that's ok. I wouldn't break up
> 0003. I think we're going to end up committing the remaining work in
> batches, although they would probably be a bit more thematically linked
> than these.

Yeah, we certainly aren't likely to do this work as
one-commit-per-datatype going forward.  I'm just wondering
how to do these initial commits so that they provide
good reference material.

			regards, tom lane