From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: ExecTypeSetColNames is fundamentally broken |
Date: | 2022-03-15 20:23:56 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZx+_6VqwZmG4Re5geiC=Jas=mAc0Jjve=b0AHVWi4q3g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 1:19 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> So the alternatives I see are to revert what bf7ca1587 tried to do
> here, or to try to make it work that way across-the-board, which
> implies (a) a very much larger amount of work, and (b) breaking
> important behaviors that are decades older than that commit.
> It's not even entirely clear that we could get to complete
> consistency if we went down that path.
Continuing my tour through the "bug fixes" section of the CommitFest,
I came upon this thread. Unfortunately there's not that much I can do
to progress it, because I've already expressed all the opinions that I
have on this thread. If we back-patch Tom's originally proposed fix, i
expect we might get a complaint or too, but the current behavior of
being able to create unreadable tables is indisputably poor, and I'm
not in a position to tell Tom that he has to go write a different fix
instead, or even that such a fix is possible. Unless somebody else
wants to comment, which IMHO would be good, I think it's up to Tom to
make a decision here on how he'd like to proceed and then, probably,
just do it.
Anyone else have thoughts?
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Stark | 2022-03-15 20:29:33 | Re: [PATCH] pgbench: add multiconnect option |
Previous Message | Daniel Verite | 2022-03-15 20:19:41 | Re: ICU for global collation |