Message-ID: <4d2e713c026632e11afeb679088112339ea74e65.camel@cybertec.at>
Subject: Re: Re: proposal: schema variables
From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=C1lvaro?= Herrera
	 <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>, jian he	
 <jian.universality@gmail.com>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>, Erik
 Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Amit Kapila
 <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>,  DUVAL REMI <REMI.DUVAL@cheops.fr>, PostgreSQL
 Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2025 21:40:34 +0100
In-Reply-To: <Z46u79BCvRKgAWLk@momjian.us>
References: <Z4pmKI2yodbDn5vw@momjian.us>
	 <202501171447.ujcoco7hy4oh@alvherre.pgsql> <Z46u79BCvRKgAWLk@momjian.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.54.3 (3.54.3-1.fc41) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4d2e713c026632e11afeb679088112339ea74e65.camel%40cybertec.at>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 2025-01-20 at 15:15 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Yes, I think we passed the Desirability criteria with the feedback on
> this thread, but it is now a question of whether the code complexity
> justifies the feature.=C2=A0 I saw a few people saying they want _some_ p=
arts
> of the patch, which opens the suggestion that even people who want the
> patch are seeing parts of the patch that are too much.=C2=A0 I have seen =
this
> patch circling around, and I think it needs a step a back for analysis.

I'd say that patches 1 to 6 from the patch set are essential.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe