| From: | "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com>, "wangw(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <wangw(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Runqi Tian <runqidev(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, li jie <ggysxcq(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>, rajesh singarapu <rajesh(dot)rs0541(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Zheng Li <zhengli10(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | RE: Support logical replication of DDLs |
| Date: | 2023-04-04 03:21:44 |
| Message-ID: | OS0PR01MB57164FF9AB6AD1B3A82E336E94939@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Friday, March 31, 2023 6:31 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
Hi,
>
> It seems that lately, the patch attachments are lacking version numbers. It
> causes unnecessary confusion. For example, I sometimes fetch patches from
> this thread locally to "diff" them with previous patches to get a rough overview
> of the changes -- that has now become more difficult.
>
> Can you please reinstate the name convention of having version numbers for all
> patch attachments?
>
> IMO *every* post that includes patches should unconditionally increment the
> patch version -- even if the new patches are just a rebase or some other trivial
> change. Version numbers make it clear what patches are the latest, you will be
> easily able to unambiguously refer to them by name in subsequent posts, and
> when copied to your local computer they won't clash with any older copied
> patches.
The patch currently use date as the version number. I think the reason is that
multiple people are working on the patch which cause the version numbers to be
changed very frequently(soon becomes a very large number). So to avoid this
, we used the date to distinguish different versions.
Best Regards,
Hou zj
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | walther | 2023-04-04 05:55:25 | Re: DEFINER / INVOKER conundrum |
| Previous Message | houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com | 2023-04-04 03:13:09 | RE: Support logical replication of DDLs |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Imseih (AWS), Sami | 2023-04-04 03:29:07 | Re: [BUG] pg_stat_statements and extended query protocol |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-04-04 03:13:12 | Re: [BUG] pg_stat_statements and extended query protocol |