| From: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>, Joel Jacobson <joel(at)compiler(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Schema variables - new implementation for Postgres 15 |
| Date: | 2022-03-03 07:16:26 |
| Message-ID: | 20220303071626.c3ok2qz7s2rya25l@jrouhaud |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 03:06:52PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 06:03:06AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> >
> > I lost commit with this change. I am sending updated patch.
Also, another thing is the size of the patch. It's probably the minimum to
have a consistent working implementation, but maybe we can still split it to
make review easier?
For instance, maybe having:
- the pg_variable part on its own, without a way to use them, maybe with
syscache helpers
- the main session variable implementation and test coverage
- plpgsql support and test coverage
- pg_dump support and test coverage
It wouldn't make the main patch that small but could still help quite a bit.
Any better suggestion?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2022-03-03 07:17:43 | Re: Changing "Hot Standby" to "hot standby" |
| Previous Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2022-03-03 07:06:52 | Re: Schema variables - new implementation for Postgres 15 |