| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: TABLESAMPLE patch is really in pretty sad shape |
| Date: | 2015-07-14 14:32:07 |
| Message-ID: | 5444.1436884327@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 13 July 2015 at 14:39, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> TBH, I think the right thing to do at this point is to revert the entire
>> patch and send it back for ground-up rework. I think the high-level
>> design is wrong in many ways and I have about zero confidence in most
>> of the code details as well.
> There are no issues relating to security or data loss, just various fixable
> issues in a low-impact feature, which in my view is an important feature
> also.
There is a *very large* amount of work needed here, and I do not hear you
promising to do it. What I'm hearing is stonewalling, and I am not happy.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thom Brown | 2015-07-14 14:52:04 | Support retrieving value from any sequence |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-07-14 14:25:10 | Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive |