pg.ddx.io pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive help / color / mirror / Atom feed From: Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org>
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
To: Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com>
Subject: Re: SQL/JSON features for v15
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:35:41 -0400
Message-ID: <5b00e2f9-1662-2a10-125f-8e4da04ce64f@postgresql.org> (raw )
In-Reply-To: <CA+HiwqHjr0UE2=OR14DWE=ykrjvLyZMvX8xFDt-GDvWm3AuMzw@mail.gmail.com >
References: <abd9b83b-aa66-f230-3d6d-734817f0995d@postgresql.org >
<7d83684b-7932-9f29-400b-0beedfafcdd4@postgrespro.ru >
<69022273-e7e3-6d1a-10f8-d1b4740e4b97@postgresql.org >
<92cab50c-152b-84fc-fd49-12b936113a3d@postgresql.org >
<CA+TgmoaAZq6rRdVA65PBXBKs=jUHhf42Jf78kBLOaX3c6J7MfQ@mail.gmail.com >
<692364.1661267311@sss.pgh.pa.us >
<35468585-e18f-3be6-a228-4ec478f796ac@postgresql.org >
<716936.1661275451@sss.pgh.pa.us >
<f1c79751-2916-a9cf-c8b9-668b9700edb8@dunslane.net >
<ab10b5df-fcc2-5871-7027-e7f73b11559d@postgresql.org >
<3596205e-ce1e-6959-7559-6ddd67f8294b@postgrespro.ru >
<cc17d718-56a1-359f-2792-01c5debd67e3@dunslane.net >
<3f8d4c2b-1e58-bf19-580e-64e9755897ef@postgrespro.ru >
<072a47f0-7a39-2266-5f90-1178a3860be1@dunslane.net >
<1992b190-f00b-8435-b561-e3c6ac450482@postgresql.org >
<59660a0b-7b7a-75ab-75c4-b6d53fbda5f6@dunslane.net >
<6ba7ba7b-9fdd-674f-c227-59a59e0de1ec@postgrespro.ru >
<CA+HiwqHjr0UE2=OR14DWE=ykrjvLyZMvX8xFDt-GDvWm3AuMzw@mail.gmail.com >
On 8/29/22 8:56 AM, Amit Langote wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 5:11 AM Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> I am not sure if it's OK to eval_const_expressions() on a Query
> sub-expression during parse-analysis. IIUC, it is only correct to
> apply it to after the rewriting phase.
>
>> Maybe it would be better to simply remove DEFAULT ON EMPTY.
>
> So +1 to this for now.
+1, if this simplifies the patch and makes it acceptable for v15
>> It is possible to easily split this patch into several subpatches,
>> I will do it if needed.
>
> That would be nice indeed.
With RMT hat on, the RMT has its weekly meetings on Tuesdays. Based on
the timing of the Beta 4 commit freeze[1] and how both
including/reverting are nontrivial operations (e.g. we should ensure
we're confident in both and that they pass through the buildfarm), we
are going to have to make a decision on how to proceed at the next meeting.
Can folks please chime in on what they think of the current patchset and
if this is acceptable for v15?
Thanks,
Jonathan
[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/9d251aec-cea2-bc1a-5ed8-46ef0bcf6c69@postgresql.org
Attachments:
OpenPGP_signature (application/pgp-signature, 839B) download
view thread (95+ messages) latest in thread
Message-ID: <5b00e2f9-1662-2a10-125f-8e4da04ce64f@postgresql.org>
Permalink: ../5b00e2f9-1662-2a10-125f-8e4da04ce64f@postgresql.org/
Also on: postgresql.org/message-id/5b00e2f9-1662-2a10-125f-8e4da04ce64f@postgresql.org
copy link · copy postgr.es
reply Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: jkatz@postgresql.org, amitlangote09@gmail.com, n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru, andrew@dunslane.net, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, robertmhaas@gmail.com, andres@anarazel.de, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, michael@paquier.xyz, john.naylor@enterprisedb.com
Subject: Re: SQL/JSON features for v15
In-Reply-To: <5b00e2f9-1662-2a10-125f-8e4da04ce64f@postgresql.org>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox