On 2022-Apr-07, Tom Lane wrote: > Just for the record, I didn't approve of that patch, and I don't > think cramming it in a few hours before feature freeze is a good > way to proceed.
> (1) We've added enough instability to the tree this week already. Several animals failed already in ways that look obviously connected to this commit, so I can't disagree: https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=grison&dt=2022-04-07%2020%3A12%3A22 https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=lapwing&dt=2022-04-07%2020%3A40%3A16 https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=florican&dt=2022-04-07%2021%3A18%3A46 > (2) I'm still quite unhappy about the idea that this particular > type of FK check will be done using fundamentally different methods > than every other type of FK check. I think that is inevitably > going to lead to semantic inconsistencies. I must have misread, then, that you were not as adamantly opposed to the idea as in your first email to the thread. I'll revert, keeping the new test. -- Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ "If you have nothing to say, maybe you need just the right tool to help you not say it." (New York Times, about Microsoft PowerPoint)