Re: Is it acceptable making COPY format extendable?
Hi, In <7a978dd2-371b-4d10-b58e-cb32ef728...@eisentraut.org> "Re: Is it acceptable making COPY format extendable?" on Thu, 25 Apr 2024 09:59:18 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > PostgreSQL development is currently in feature freeze for PostgreSQL > 17 (since April 8). So most participants will not be looking very > closely at development projects for releases beyond that. The next > commitfest for patches targeting PostgreSQL 18 is in July, and I see > your patch registered there. It's possible that your thread is not > going to get much attention until then. > > So, in summary, you are doing everything right, you just have to be a > bit more patient right now. :) I see. I'll wait for the next commitfest. Thanks, -- kou
Re: Is it acceptable making COPY format extendable?
On 25.04.24 06:53, Sutou Kouhei wrote: I haven't got any reply since 2024-03-15: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20240315.173754.2049843193122381085.kou%40clear-code.com#07aefc636d8165204ddfba971dc9a490 (I sent some pings.) So I called this status as "stalled". I'm not familiar with the PostgreSQL's development style. What should I do for this case? Should I just wait for a reply from others without doing anything? PostgreSQL development is currently in feature freeze for PostgreSQL 17 (since April 8). So most participants will not be looking very closely at development projects for releases beyond that. The next commitfest for patches targeting PostgreSQL 18 is in July, and I see your patch registered there. It's possible that your thread is not going to get much attention until then. So, in summary, you are doing everything right, you just have to be a bit more patient right now. :)
Re: Is it acceptable making COPY format extendable?
Hi, Thanks for replying this. In <02cccd36-3083-4a50-aae4-f957e96fb...@eisentraut.org> "Re: Is it acceptable making COPY format extendable?" on Wed, 24 Apr 2024 09:57:38 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> I'm proposing a patch that making COPY format extendable: >> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20231204.153548.2126325458835528809.kou%40clear-code.com >> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/48/4681/ >> >> But my proposal stalled. It it acceptable the feature >> request that making COPY format extendable? If it's not >> acceptable, what are blockers? Performance? > > I think that thread is getting an adequate amount of attention. Of > course, you can always wish for more, but "stalled" looks very > different. Sorry for "stalled" misuse. I haven't got any reply since 2024-03-15: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20240315.173754.2049843193122381085.kou%40clear-code.com#07aefc636d8165204ddfba971dc9a490 (I sent some pings.) So I called this status as "stalled". I'm not familiar with the PostgreSQL's development style. What should I do for this case? Should I just wait for a reply from others without doing anything? > Let's not start a new thread here to discuss the merits of the other > thread; that discussion belongs there. I wanted to discuss possibility for this feature request in this thread. I wanted to use my existing thread is for how to implement this feature request. Should I reuse https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAJ7c6TM6Bz1c3F04Cy6%2BSzuWfKmr0kU8c_3Stnvh_8BR0D6k8Q%40mail.gmail.com for it instead of this thread? Thanks, -- kou
Re: Is it acceptable making COPY format extendable?
On 23.04.24 07:14, Sutou Kouhei wrote: Hi, I'm proposing a patch that making COPY format extendable: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20231204.153548.2126325458835528809.kou%40clear-code.com https://commitfest.postgresql.org/48/4681/ It's based on the discussion at: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/3741749.1655952...@sss.pgh.pa.us#2bb7af4a3d2c7669f9a49808d777a20d IIUC, you want extensibility in FORMAT argument to COPY command https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sql-copy.html. Where the format is pluggable. That seems useful. Agreed. Ditto. But my proposal stalled. It it acceptable the feature request that making COPY format extendable? If it's not acceptable, what are blockers? Performance? I think that thread is getting an adequate amount of attention. Of course, you can always wish for more, but "stalled" looks very different. Let's not start a new thread here to discuss the merits of the other thread; that discussion belongs there.
Is it acceptable making COPY format extendable?
Hi, I'm proposing a patch that making COPY format extendable: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20231204.153548.2126325458835528809.kou%40clear-code.com https://commitfest.postgresql.org/48/4681/ It's based on the discussion at: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/3741749.1655952...@sss.pgh.pa.us#2bb7af4a3d2c7669f9a49808d777a20d > > > IIUC, you want extensibility in FORMAT argument to COPY command > > > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sql-copy.html. Where the > > > format is pluggable. That seems useful. > > > Agreed. > > Ditto. But my proposal stalled. It it acceptable the feature request that making COPY format extendable? If it's not acceptable, what are blockers? Performance? Thanks, -- kou
