| From: | Ayush Tiwari <ayushtiwari(dot)slg01(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
| Cc: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: Remove the refint contrib module (for v20) |
| Date: | 2026-07-15 13:47:39 |
| Message-ID: | CAJTYsWW1ToYgBoi-ZLc2KBE3Hp+uvBHWOxuk947+OTcowxLpyA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Sat, 6 Jun 2026 at 03:35, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> wrote:
> > On 5 Jun 2026, at 23:05, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 06, 2026 at 12:57:56AM +0530, Ayush Tiwari wrote:
> >> Thoughts? Does this look like the right approach, or is there a
> >> reason to keep refint around?
> >
> > +1. Do we need an appendix-obsolete entry for the docs?
>
> Seems like a reasonable thing to add. Once merged, we should probably add
> (and
> backpatch) a mention to the docs that the functionality will be removed in
> v20.
>
As you suggested, here's the back-branch doc change noting that refint
will be removed in v20, pointing users to the built-in foreign key
functionality.
I extended the existing paragraph (following the xml2/intagg deprecation
style) rather than adding a separate note. Intended for back-patch to all
supported branches (13-19).
Thoughts?
Regards,
Ayush
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v1-0001-Add-note-that-refint-will-be-removed-in-v20.patch | application/octet-stream | 1.4 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2026-07-15 13:56:15 | Re: pg_hosts: Add pg_hosts_file_rules() |
| Previous Message | Anton Voloshin | 2026-07-15 13:35:44 | Re: NULL pointer dereference in syslogger with load_libraries() and -DEXEC_BACKEND at startup |