| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Emmanuel Cecchet <manu(at)asterdata(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Emmanuel Cecchet <Emmanuel(dot)Cecchet(at)asterdata(dot)com>, Selena Deckelmann <selenamarie(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: COPY enhancements |
| Date: | 2009-10-07 14:29:08 |
| Message-ID: | 9109.1254925748@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Emmanuel Cecchet wrote:
>> If you prefer to postpone the auto-partitioning to the next commit
>> fest, I can strip it from the current patch and re-submit it for the
>> next fest (but it's just 2 isolated methods really easy to review).
> I certainly think this should be separated out. In general it is not a
> good idea to roll distinct features together. It complicates both the
> reviewing process and the discussion.
I think though that Greg was suggesting that we need some more thought
about the overall road map. Agglomerating "independent" features onto
COPY one at a time is going to lead to a mess, unless they fit into an
overall design plan.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gnanam | 2009-10-07 14:34:52 | Deadlock error in INSERT statements |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-10-07 14:29:07 | Re: Hot Standby 0.2.1 |