On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 12:26:34PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 10:43:17AM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> Makes sense. Here's a new patch set. 0001 is the part intended for
>> back-patching, and 0002 is the rest (i.e., adding pg_attribute_nonnull()).
>> I switched to using __has_attribute to discover whether nonnull was
>
> Okay, I have looked at 0001 this morning and applied it down to 12.
> The change in GetConfigOptionByNum() is not required in 10 and 11, as
> the strings of pg_show\all_settings() have begun to be translated in
> 12~.
Thanks!
>> supported, as that seemed cleaner. I didn't see any need for a new
>> configure check, but maybe I am missing something.
>
> And I've learnt today that we enforce a definition of __has_attribute
> at the top of c.h, and that we already rely on that. So I agree that
> what you are doing in 0002 should be enough. Should we wait until 16~
> opens for business though? I don't see a strong argument to push
> forward with that now that we are in beta mode on HEAD.
Yeah, I see no reason that this should go into v15. I created a new
commitfest entry so that this isn't forgotten:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/38/3655/
And I've reposted 0002 here so that we get some cfbot coverage in the
meantime.
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com