From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Parallel safety tagging of extension functions |
Date: | 2016-05-25 01:43:16 |
Message-ID: | 20160525014316.GV21416@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
All,
* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> writes:
> > On 05/25/2016 02:41 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> I'd rather extend see us ALTER AGGREGATE to do this.
>
> > Wouldn't that prevent this from going into 9.6? I do not think changing
> > ALTER AGGREGATE is 9.6 materials.
>
> Well, it's debatable --- but if the patch to do it is small and the
> alternatives are really ugly, that would be an acceptable choice IMO.
> Certainly we'd want to add that capability eventually anyway.
I tend to agree with Tom on this. This should really have been included
in the earlier patches, but there's no help for that and if it's a small
patch and the other options are far worse then we need to accept that
solution and move on.
Thanks!
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tsunakawa, Takayuki | 2016-05-25 01:49:51 | Re: Is the unfair lwlock behavior intended? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-05-25 01:37:44 | Re: Parallel safety tagging of extension functions |