public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
To: Álvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <[email protected]>
Cc: jian he <[email protected]>
Cc: Dmitry Dolgov <[email protected]>
Cc: Laurenz Albe <[email protected]>
Cc: Erik Rijkers <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: Amit Kapila <[email protected]>
Cc: DUVAL REMI <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Re: proposal: schema variables
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2025 15:15:43 -0500
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 03:47:28PM +0100, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2025-Jan-17, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Is this really something we are considering applying, since it has been
> > around for years? I am unclear on that and we had better know if we are
> > going to continue reviewing this.
>
> The fact that the patch has been around for years doesn't automatically
> mean it's a bad idea.
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. I saw a few people saying they want _some_ parts
of the patch, which opens the suggestion that even people who want the
patch are seeing parts of the patch that are too much. I have seen this
patch circling around, and I think it needs a step a back for analysis.
> I have proposed that we discuss this patch at fosdem developer's meeting
> next month, precisely to seek consensus on whether this patch is
> something we want or not. My view is that this is a feature that has
> been requested by users for years, so IMO we want this or something
> similar.
Yes, the meeting review is a very good idea.
> I wonder if the reason that committers stay away from it is that
> reviewing it fully (and thus taking responsibility for it) seems such a
> daunting task. I might be wrong, but I think this may be the largest
> patch since FTS.
I think we have to identify a committer who is willing to consider
application of this patch before the patch can move forward.
--
Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.
view thread (439+ messages) latest in thread
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], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Re: proposal: schema variables
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* 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