Re: pgsql: Add pg_alterckey utility to change the cluster key
От
Fabien COELHO
Тема
Re: pgsql: Add pg_alterckey utility to change the cluster key
Дата
Msg-id
alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2012260543130.2006135@pseudo
Ответ на
Re: pgsql: Add pg_alterckey utility to change the cluster key (Michael Paquier)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
pgsql: Add pg_alterckey utility to change the cluster key Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Re: pgsql: Add pg_alterckey utility to change the cluster key Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: pgsql: Add pg_alterckey utility to change the cluster key Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Re: pgsql: Add pg_alterckey utility to change the cluster key Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: pgsql: Add pg_alterckey utility to change the cluster key Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
Re: pgsql: Add pg_alterckey utility to change the cluster key Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Re: pgsql: Add pg_alterckey utility to change the cluster key Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Re: pgsql: Add pg_alterckey utility to change the cluster key Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Re: pgsql: Add pg_alterckey utility to change the cluster key Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Re: pgsql: Add pg_alterckey utility to change the cluster key Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: pgsql: Add pg_alterckey utility to change the cluster key Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Hello Bruce Tom>> Possibly these commits need more review than you think. Michaël> Shared feeling here, I think that this is still too early. Michaël> FWIW, I am surprised that this patch series includes exactly zero line of code Michaël> for tests, while the total amount of code committed is close to Michaël> 3000 lines. I intended to have a look at all that, but it got committed before I had time to do it. Ok, I do not have much time these past months, but I've been quite surprised anyway by the speed for such a feature/patch. The feeling I expressed early in the thread is that the design should be extendable, so that it does not fit only one particular use-case but fail at any other that were not the author's, and a large reimplementation would be needed to get them in. I was thinking of having a closer look with that in mind. In particular and IMHO, the "master key" should not (necessarily) be hold by a postgres process, not sure what the current status is, but that is an example. Committing such amount of codes and features without any test is much too blunt. Why the rush? Question: Should these patches be reverted till the stuff is properly stabilized, tested and reviewed? -- Fabien.
В списке pgsql-committers по дате отправления
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
От: Robins Tharakan
Дата: