On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 27 October 2014 15:55, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Commenting on one aspect of a patch doesn't imply agreement with
>> other aspects of the patch. Please don't put words into my mouth. I
>> haven't reviewed this patch in detail; I've only commented on specific
>> aspects of it as they have arisen in discussion. I may or may not
>> someday review it in detail, but not before I'm fairly confident that
>> the known issues raised by other community members have been addressed
>> as thoroughly as possible.
>
> +1
I wasn't putting words in anyone's mouth; I *don't* think that it's
true that Robert thinks patches 0001-* and 0002-* are perfectly fine,
and implied as much myself. I just think the *strongly* worded
disapproval of the user-visible interface of 0003-* was odd; it was
way out of proportion to its immediate importance to getting this
patch on track. AFAICT it was the *only* feedback that I didn't act on
with V1.3 (Robert's complaint about how inference happens during parse
analysis was a response to V1.3).
I'm not always going to be able to act on every item of feedback
immediately, or I'll have my own ideas about how to handle certain
things. I don't think that's all that big of a deal, since I've acted
on almost all feedback. I think by far the biggest problem here is the
lack of attention to the design from others.
I did a lot of copy-editing to the Wiki page yesterday. There are
actually few clear open items now:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/UPSERT#Open_Items
Some previous "open items" have been moved to here:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/UPSERT#Miscellaneous_odd_properties_of_proposed_ON_CONFLICT_patch
This is basically a section describing things that have not been
controversial or in need of adjusting, and may well never be, but I
wish we'd talk about because they're in some way novel or
counter-intuitive. This is the kind of things I'd like us to discuss
more.
--
Peter Geoghegan