On 23.3.2015 18:30, Andres Freund wrote:
>>>
>>> I think it fairly can be marked as "returned with feedback" for
>>> now?
That will eventually be the end result, yes. If it's time to do that
now, or leave the patch in the CF and only bounce it at the end, I don't
know.
>>
>> ... which means that no useful feedback was received at all in
>> this round for this patch. (There was lots of feedback, mind you,
>> but as far as I can see it was all on the subject of how the patch
>> is going to be summarily rejected unless user-visible controls are
>> offered -- and you already know my opinion on that matter.)
>
> To me the actual blocker seems to be the implementation. Which
> doesn't look like it's going to be ready for 9.5; there seems to be
> loads of work left to do. It's hard to provide non flame-bait
> feedback if the patch isn't ready. I'm not sure what review you'd
> like to see at this stage?
The version I posted at the end of February is certainly incomplete (and
some of the regression tests fail), but it seemed reasonably complete to
get some feedback. That is not to say parts of the patch are probably
wrong / need rework.
> I think your approach of concentrating on the technical parts is
> sane, and I'd continue going that way.
I do work in that direction. OTOH I think it's useful to provide some
sort of "minimum usable API" so that people can actually use it without
messing with catalogs directly. It certainly won't have all the bells
and whistles, though.
--
Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services