From: | Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, George Gensure <werkt0(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: patch - Report the schema along table name in a referential failure error message |
Date: | 2009-11-15 22:18:36 |
Message-ID: | 37ed240d0911151418i74b70a93t90ed407131ddb094@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2009/11/16 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> The real problem with the entry that George picked up on was that it was
> misdescribed and mislabeled as easy because whoever put it in ignored
> the fact that there was not a consensus to do a half-baked fix ...
> this is a problem with a wiki TODO list :-(
Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that it's a problem with *any*
TODO list? I don't see what the wiki has to do with it. Garbage in,
garbage out. A poorly described item will always be trouble
regardless of what form it is in.
However, I'm not sure how productive the [E]asy marker can really be.
Items end up on the TODO generally because a) we couldn't settle on a
way forward, or b) nobody was keen to do it right away. There just
aren't many genuinely "easy" items in there, easy ones usually get
done right away.
Cheers,
BJ
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-11-15 22:20:58 | Re: Listen / Notify rewrite |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-11-15 22:17:05 | Re: Summary and Plan for Hot Standby |