public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Peter Smith <[email protected]>
To: Shlok Kyal <[email protected]>
Cc: shveta malik <[email protected]>
Cc: vignesh C <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Support EXCEPT for ALL SEQUENCES publications
Date: Mon, 25 May 2026 17:37:22 +1000
Message-ID: <CAHut+PsUrYmbZ996ZybjMWvpW_ufXB8WM94pdvAPyzQpoe+HRA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANhcyEW03XO5tLb7opt1yQGHWJ7Ew=L65EWcdrKH=F0mUpuR3A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANhcyEVSXyQkvmrsOWPdQqnm2J3GMyQQrKhyCJiBQzqs6AvSow@mail.gmail.com>
<CALDaNm125dv88fUDgBPBM-N-hXbF0NLqKe-ymEpMRNymUYRQAA@mail.gmail.com>
<CANhcyEUxgzaNJNNO_-12wYwGLihpuKmsMH2g4TFnRPx5AQVZmg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJpy0uBB4N8KOrHchdgprVi2Ws1+gTcEr+bC2A_ziAHOcZcTqA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJpy0uCAJQvBjD7qNWWGnZP_LDwS8AiUJC7YMict9UcYqH=XeQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CANhcyEU_Yq9ZJ2n5Sqa7RoHze0TD0RGxLQQgV1F6Jm2AROEh8g@mail.gmail.com>
<CANhcyEWj-ECj=WC+HD_kv27Dn6FkTngFQCVJVTVZfJnjCTKMBQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CANhcyEW03XO5tLb7opt1yQGHWJ7Ew=L65EWcdrKH=F0mUpuR3A@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Shlok -
I wonder if it might be worth reconsidering the split between patches
0001 and 0002. My understanding is that the only reason for splitting
is to make review easier, but it had the opposite effect for me.
The difficulty is that 0001 contains renaming of functions and
variables whose purpose only becomes clear in 0002. Without any
context, the changes in 0001 are hard to evaluate on their own merits
— anybody reading patch 0001 is left guessing what is coming rather
than seeing the full picture.
It also won't be saving much overall patch size, since AFAICT most of
the same locations are touched again in 0002 anyway.
There is also the matter of identifier renames (patch 0001) being
separated from their associated comment updates (0002). Keeping those
together would reduce the risk of anything being inadvertently missed.
I think a combined 0001/0002 patch would be easier to follow, since
reviewers could see each change alongside its reason.
======
Kind Regards
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia
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: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Support EXCEPT for ALL SEQUENCES publications
In-Reply-To: <CAHut+PsUrYmbZ996ZybjMWvpW_ufXB8WM94pdvAPyzQpoe+HRA@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox