On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 03:01:27PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > Sounds like a good reason to remove add_missing_from in 8.5.
>
> Seems like the general consensus is that it's okay to do that.
> I will go make it happen unless somebody squawks pretty soon...
>
>
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> Squawk. I am currently travelling. Please give me until early next week
> to research and react.
Okay, I'll hold off for a bit. For reference, attached is the patch
I was about to apply. This doesn't do any of the refactoring I had
in mind, it just removes the implicit
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian writes:
Sounds like a good reason to remove add_missing_from in 8.5.
Seems like the general consensus is that it's okay to do that.
I will go make it happen unless somebody squawks pretty soon...
Squawk. I am currently travelling. Please give me u
Bruce Momjian writes:
> Sounds like a good reason to remove add_missing_from in 8.5.
Seems like the general consensus is that it's okay to do that.
I will go make it happen unless somebody squawks pretty soon...
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (
2009/10/17 Dimitri Fontaine :
> Tom Lane writes:
>> "Do nothing" isn't the right phrase here --- it would take a great deal
>> of work and ugly, hard-to-maintain code to get it to work even that badly.
>> The code paths in transformColumnRef are fairly messy already :-(.
>> Getting rid of add_miss
Tom Lane writes:
> "Do nothing" isn't the right phrase here --- it would take a great deal
> of work and ugly, hard-to-maintain code to get it to work even that badly.
> The code paths in transformColumnRef are fairly messy already :-(.
> Getting rid of add_missing_from would definitely make it ea
Tom Lane wrote:
> Greg Stark writes:
> > On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> However, if the columnref looks like "x.y" where x happens to
> >> match some table in the database (and not in the query) that doesn't
> >> have a column y, the implicit-RTE code will have already mod
Greg Stark writes:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> However, if the columnref looks like "x.y" where x happens to
>> match some table in the database (and not in the query) that doesn't
>> have a column y, the implicit-RTE code will have already modified the
>> querytree bef
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Tom Lane wrote:
So, while I do think it's something we should leave alone until it gets
in the way, this is a sufficiently large value of "in the way" that I'm
willing to talk about removing add_missing_from. I'm just concerned
about the impact of that, considering that a
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Greg Stark wrote:
It only affects OpenACS if they want to upgrade to 8.5 which will
presumably mean other application changes as well. Though probaby none
requiring as much major code changes as this.
Being one that hosts alot of OACS sites, and has a fair experience with
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> However, if the columnref looks like "x.y" where x happens to
> match some table in the database (and not in the query) that doesn't
> have a column y, the implicit-RTE code will have already modified the
> querytree before finding out that colum
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 9:26 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> So, while I do think it's something we should leave alone until it gets
> in the way, this is a sufficiently large value of "in the way" that I'm
> willing to talk about removing add_missing_from. I'm just concerned
> about the impact of that, co
Greg Stark writes:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> (I would actually not mind getting rid of it, because that would greatly
>> simplify a problem I'm wrestling with right now, namely how to put hooks
>> into the parser for resolution of plpgsql variables. But we need to be
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> (I would actually not mind getting rid of it, because that would greatly
> simplify a problem I'm wrestling with right now, namely how to put hooks
> into the parser for resolution of plpgsql variables. But we need to be
> honest about what it's
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 01:23:16PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter writes:
> > We have some really silly legacy stuff in PostgreSQL, the silliest
> > of which, as far as I've found, is the add_missing_from GUC.
>
> Considering that we just had a discussion about a significant
> application
David Fetter writes:
> We have some really silly legacy stuff in PostgreSQL, the silliest of
> which, as far as I've found, is the add_missing_from GUC.
Considering that we just had a discussion about a significant
application that's still using it, I'm not sure what's your hurry.
Is your intent
Folks,
We have some really silly legacy stuff in PostgreSQL, the silliest of
which, as far as I've found, is the add_missing_from GUC.
Since it's been deprecated, as in off by default, since 8.1, I'd like
to suggest that we remove it from both docs and code and throw an
error if someone tries to
17 matches
Mail list logo
