I'm trying to figure out how to get this feature more attention. Everyone agrees it would be a huge help but it's a scary patch to review.
I wonder if it would be helpful to have a kind of "readers guide" explanation of the patches to help a reviewer understand what the point of each patch is and how the whole system works? I think Andres and Robert have both taken that approach before with big patches and it really helped imho. On Fri., Apr. 22, 2022, 08:01 Yugo NAGATA, <nag...@sraoss.co.jp> wrote: > On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 11:29:39 +0900 > Yugo NAGATA <nag...@sraoss.co.jp> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > On Fri, 1 Apr 2022 11:09:16 -0400 > > Greg Stark <st...@mit.edu> wrote: > > > > > This patch has bitrotted due to some other patch affecting trigger.c. > > > > > > Could you post a rebase? > > > > > > This is the last week of the CF before feature freeze so time is of > the essence. > > > > I attached a rebased patch-set. > > > > Also, I made the folowing changes from the previous. > > > > 1. Fix to not use a new deptye > > > > In the previous patch, we introduced a new deptye 'm' into pg_depend. > > This deptype was used for looking for IVM triggers to be removed at > > REFRESH WITH NO DATA. However, we decided to not use it for reducing > > unnecessary change in the core code. Currently, the trigger name and > > dependent objclass are used at that time instead of it. > > > > As a result, the number of patches are reduced to nine from ten. > > > > 2. Bump the version numbers in psql and pg_dump > > > > This feature's target is PG 16 now. > > Sorry, I revert this change. It was too early to bump up the > version number. > > -- > Yugo NAGATA <nag...@sraoss.co.jp> >
