Re: [HACKERS] Surjective functional indexes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Surjective functional indexes
Date
Msg-id 28044.1547507004@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Surjective functional indexes  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Surjective functional indexes  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2018-11-07 14:25:54 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> In short, it seems likely to me that large parts of this patch need to
>> be pulled out, rewritten, and then put back in different places than
>> they are today.  I'm not sure if a complete revert is the best next
>> step, or if we can make progress without that.

> We've not really made progress on this. I continue to think that we
> ought to revert this feature, and then work to re-merge it an
> architecturally correct way afterwards.  Other opinions?

Given the lack of progress, I'd agree with a revert.  It's probably
already going to be a bit painful to undo due to subsequent changes,
so we shouldn't wait too much longer.

Do we want to revert entirely, or leave the "recheck_on_update" option
present but nonfunctional?

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: legrand legrand
Date:
Subject: Re: explain plans with information about (modified) gucs
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Surjective functional indexes