Re: POC: Lock updated tuples in tuple_update() and tuple_delete()

On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 5:20 PM Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 11:00 AM Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > You're designing new APIs, days before the feature freeze.
> > On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 at 06:54, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 01:25:46AM +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> > > > Pavel, thank you for you review, revisions and rebase.
> > > > We'll reconsider this once v17 is branched.
> >
> > I've looked through patches v16 once more and think they're good
> > enough, and previous issues are all addressed. I see that there is
> > nothing that blocks it from being committed except the last iteration
> > was days before v16 feature freeze.
> >
> > Recently in another thread [1] Alexander posted a new version of
> > patches v16 (as 0001 and 0002) In 0001 only indenation, comments, and
> > commit messages changed from v16 in this thread. In 0002 new test
> > eval-plan-qual-2 was integrated into the existing eval-plan-qual test.
> > For maintaining the most recent versions in this thread I'm attaching
> > them under v17. I suppose that we can commit these patches to v17 if
> > there are no objections or additional reviews.
> >
> > [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAPpHfdurb9ycV8udYqM%3Do0sPS66PJ4RCBM1g-bBpvzUfogY0EA%40mail.gmail.com
>
> The new revision of patches is attached.
>
> It has updated commit messages, new comments, and some variables were
> renamed to be more consistent with surroundings.
>
> I also think that all the design issues spoken before are resolved.
> It would be nice to hear from Andres about this.
>
> I'll continue rechecking these patches myself.

I've re-read this thread. It still seems to me that the issues raised
before are addressed now. Fingers crossed, I'm going to push this if
there are no objections.

------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov