Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------KqBGQSBH8MKnvLeFPkAOJS0q"
Message-ID: <d682c11c-0d2e-453a-9af8-166fcca4c3b1@postgrespro.ru>
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2025 12:45:37 +0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [fixed] Trigger test
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Paul Jungwirth <pj@illuminatedcomputing.com>,
 PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
 Lilian <ontowhee@gmail.com>
References: <79755a2b18ed4fe5e29da6a87a1e00d1@postgrespro.ru>
 <7879fede654a17b9fcc8548de2cb3f69@postgrespro.ru>
 <174293570374.60294.13024599409215069922.pgcf@coridan.postgresql.org>
 <17a8a24f7295201873d105c5118024f5@postgrespro.ru>
 <766da800-4884-41a9-8e8e-71d131dc599c@illuminatedcomputing.com>
 <81a79dfc-b6b1-4155-90b6-c06201d84afb@postgrespro.ru>
 <1441543.1743703890@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Dmitrii Bondar <d.bondar@postgrespro.ru>
In-Reply-To: <1441543.1743703890@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/d682c11c-0d2e-453a-9af8-166fcca4c3b1%40postgrespro.ru>
Precedence: bulk

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------KqBGQSBH8MKnvLeFPkAOJS0q
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


On 04/04/2025 01:11, Tom Lane wrote:
> So that's a long laundry list and we haven't even dug hard.
> Is it worth it?  If you feel like doing the legwork then
> I'm willing to support the project, but I really wonder if
> we shouldn't cut our losses and just remove the module.
>
> (I hesitate now to look at the rest of contrib/spi/ :-()

You wrote a note that I decided to omit. As I mentioned, the patch does 
not even fix the cascade update problem—there are still broken 
cases—because it seems impossible to address it in a gentle way (the 
code was patched 20 years ago; it's truly legacy).

I considered removing it entirely, but that seemed too drastic a 
solution (and, at the very least, I don't have enough expertise to make 
that decision). If everything looks acceptable, I would prefer to cut 
the module. The |check_primary_key| and |check_foreign| functions are 
clearly unused, are buggy, and no one has reported any obvious 
problems—so refint.c can be safely removed. Autoinc.c also looks 
problematic.

There are some question. When should we remove the module? Should we 
mark it as deprecated for now and remove it later? Should we handle it 
in another thread? Should we apply this patch in that case?

Best regards,

Dmitrii

--------------KqBGQSBH8MKnvLeFPkAOJS0q
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 04/04/2025 01:11, Tom Lane wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:1441543.1743703890@sss.pgh.pa.us"><span
      style="white-space: pre-wrap">
</span><span style="white-space: pre-wrap">
</span>
      <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">So that's a long laundry list and we haven't even dug hard.
Is it worth it?  If you feel like doing the legwork then
I'm willing to support the project, but I really wonder if
we shouldn't cut our losses and just remove the module.

(I hesitate now to look at the rest of contrib/spi/ :-()
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <p data-start="88" data-end="342" class="">You wrote a note that I
      decided to omit. As I mentioned, the patch does not even fix the
      cascade update problem—there are still broken cases—because it
      seems impossible to address it in a gentle way (the code was
      patched 20 years ago; it's truly legacy).</p>
    <p data-start="344" data-end="761" class="">I considered removing it
      entirely, but that seemed too drastic a solution (and, at the very
      least, I don't have enough expertise to make that decision). If
      everything looks acceptable, I would prefer to cut the module. The
      <code data-start="567" data-end="586">check_primary_key</code> and
      <code data-start="591" data-end="606">check_foreign</code>
      functions are clearly unused, are buggy, and no one has reported
      any obvious problems—so refint.c can be safely removed. Autoinc.c
      also looks problematic.</p>
    <p data-start="763" data-end="942" class="">There are some question.
      When should we remove the module? Should we mark it as deprecated
      for now and remove it later? Should we handle it in another
      thread? Should we apply this patch in that case?</p>
    <p data-start="763" data-end="942" class="">Best regards,</p>
    <p data-start="763" data-end="942" class="">Dmitrii<br>
    </p>
  </body>
</html>

--------------KqBGQSBH8MKnvLeFPkAOJS0q--