On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 07:32:57PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > I don't know, but this stuff is so unused that your patch seems > excessive ... and I think we'd rather not backpatch something so large. > I propose we do something less invasive in the backbranches, like just > throw elog() errors (nothing fancy) where necessary to avoid the > crashes. Even for pg12 it seems that that should be sufficient.
Even knowing that those trigger a bunch of elog()s which are not something that should be user-triggerable? :) Perhaps you are right though, and that we don't need to spend this much energy into improving the error messages so I am fine to discard this part. At the end, in order to remove the crashes, you just need to keep around the two RELKIND_HAS_STORAGE() checks. But I would rather keep these two to use ereport(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED) instead of elog(), and keep the test coverage of the previous patch (including the tests for the aggregates I noticed were missing). Would you be fine with that? > For pg13 and beyond, I liked Tom's idea of installing dummy functions > for tables without storage -- that seems safer. Not sure about that for v13. That would be invasive post-beta. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
