Re: Changed SRF in targetlist handling

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Changed SRF in targetlist handling
Date: 2016-12-08 22:18:30
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZcjnMe0cHQNa=L8gn8a331PYHdD4rkxD9HL7GhH7wxYA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
>> On 2016-08-17 17:41:28 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> Tom, do you think this is roughly going in the right direction?
>
> I've not had time to look at this patch, I'm afraid. If you still
> want me to, I can make time in a day or so.

Tom, it's been about 3.5 months since you wrote this. I think it
would be really valuable if you could get to this RSN because the
large patch set posted on the "Changed SRF in targetlist handling"
thread is backed up behind this -- and I think that's really valuable
work which I don't want to see slip out of this release. At the same
time, both that and this are quite invasive, and I don't want it all
to get committed the day before feature freeze, because that will mess
up the schedule.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-12-08 22:20:56 Re: pg_dump vs. TRANSFORMs
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2016-12-08 21:57:53 Re: Time to drop old-style (V0) functions?