Re: SQL MERGE patches for PostgreSQL Versions

From: Kang Yuzhe <tiggreen87(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, bxzhai2010(at)gmail(dot)com
Subject: Re: SQL MERGE patches for PostgreSQL Versions
Date: 2017-06-22 08:30:09
Message-ID: CAH=t1kpq8R_VpSv=UsJmggk4YuAnDtM4a_-Ps1=XAzpWADzhEQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Kang Yuzhe <tiggreen87(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> First my apology if I appear to be a jerk or not following the policy.
>
> No problem.
>
>> I emailed Boxuan Zhai who was in charge of the SQL Merge keyword in
>> 2010 of GSoC but without reply.
>>
>> I want to apply merge_v201.patch to specific PG version.
>>
>> It failed saying 1 or 2 of 5 hunk failed.
>>
>> My question is:
>> 1. Given x old patch of PG, is it possible to know to which PG
>> version can be applied?
>> 2. If not possible, can someone tell me the general approach to apply
>> given old patch(merge_v201.patch) to PG.
>> 3. Who was the mentor of SQL Merge of GSoC in 2010 and if present in
>> this PG Community, can he/she tell me which PG version was applied SQL
>> Merge?
>>
>> My goal is to apply SQL Merge patch into PG successfully and to from
>> learn the code applied.
>
> If the goal is to learn from the past code and you are not really
> willing to fix code conflicts, you could always try to apply a patch
> of 2010 using a version of the master branch located between 8.4 and
> 9.0 :)
I wish I could but it's because I don't believe that I have the right
capability to fix code conflicts. My ultimate goal is to be PG hacker
like YOU. Anyway, I will consider your perspective.
Regards,
Zeray

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sokolov Yura 2017-06-22 08:42:43 Re: An attempt to reduce WALWriteLock contention
Previous Message Yugo Nagata 2017-06-22 08:24:57 Re: Optional message to user when terminating/cancelling backend