Feedback-ID: i0fe9450f:Fastmail
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2024 11:19:00 +0900
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>,
	Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
	Ayush Vatsa <ayushvatsa1810@gmail.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Pgstattuple on Sequences: Seeking Community Feedback on
 Potential Patch
Message-ID: <ZuJPlHWN6HOO9AYD@paquier.xyz>
References: 
 <CA+TgmoYm0X=KuHry1A6prNzf3pUmAcXYgQEr25kCY8jSMJaVjg@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZszGBMK1D4hCsRnD@nathan>
 <CACX+KaNhg-ZwkqCSjsq7j_gRYDmHip2b4kwa6ohac0MspSeW9w@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZtCxo95K_bqGbmNQ@nathan>
 <CA+TgmoaHX9BYrr1u9c356ovGwVBy25Q9y_LdSYS8JW0pqd18JA@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZtI0O-bN90P02oQO@nathan>
 <CAEze2WiNB=wjrtQGERk2mmkpOZevGCfTT7ei6guJsFG4VRmacA@mail.gmail.com>
 <Ztd0VcV2PQJf5jUJ@nathan>
 <ZuH_PB1S3JuWvNPq@nathan>
 <CAEze2Wh_KkMthGmGiW+v9hFN90L066Vt3VQdEFmwmi03CgFRkA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Erdj+CmzrbRi9krR"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEze2Wh_KkMthGmGiW+v9hFN90L066Vt3VQdEFmwmi03CgFRkA@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ZuJPlHWN6HOO9AYD%40paquier.xyz>
Precedence: bulk


--Erdj+CmzrbRi9krR
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 11:02:43PM +0100, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Sept 2024 at 21:36, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> =
wrote:
> >
> > Barring objections, I'm planning to commit v3 soon.  Robert/Matthias, I=
'm
> > not sure you are convinced this is the right thing to do (or worth doin=
g,
> > rather), but I don't sense that you are actually opposed to it, either.
> > Please correct me if I am wrong.
>=20
> Correct: I do think making heapam-related inspection functions have a
> consistent behaviour when applied to sequences is beneficial, with no
> preference towards specifically supporting or not supporting sequences
> in these functions. If people that work on sequences think it's better
> to also support inspection of sequences, then I think that's a good
> reason to add that support where it doesn't already exist.
>=20
> As for patch v3, that seems fine with me.

+1 from here as well, after looking at what v3 is doing for these two
modules.
--
Michael

--Erdj+CmzrbRi9krR
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=6NgD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Erdj+CmzrbRi9krR--