From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Use %u to print user mapping's umid and userid |
Date: | 2016-05-12 18:53:32 |
Message-ID: | 5320.1463079212@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> My suggestion is that we switch from using a List to marshal the data
> to using an ExtensibleNode. An advantage of that is that we'd have
> some in-core test coverage for the ExtensibleNode stuff. In theory it
> ought to be simpler and less messy, too, but I guess we'll find out.
Seems like a good idea, or at least one worth trying.
> Regardless of what approach we take, I disagree that this needs to be
> fixed in 9.6.
Agreed. This is only a cosmetic issue, and it's only going to be visible
to a very small group of people, so we can leave it alone until 9.7.
(FWIW, now that we've put in the list_make5 macros, I'd vote against
taking them out, independently of what happens in postgres_fdw.
Somebody else will need them someday, or indeed might already be
using them in some non-core extension.)
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-05-12 19:02:34 | Re: Does Type Have = Operator? |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-05-12 18:43:24 | Re: alter table alter column ... (larger type) ... when there are dependent views |