Re: CF app feature request - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: CF app feature request
Date
Msg-id CABUevEzFjC_rOMvaLDL9Ha4=5n94AqS1bEyxuDB5gJzRoGn-mA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: CF app feature request  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers


On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 7:19 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> I'm trying to figure out where this thread left off :) My understanding of
> the consensus is we don't actually want/need a change in the app, but are
> instead OK with the admin just handling it a somewhat ugly way in the few
> cases where it's necessary?

The original case (just a mistakenly duplicated entry) seems OK to solve
with a quick DELETE on the underlying table.

> Or is the consensus to add a "Withdrawn" status, just to solve a slightly
> different problem from the one that started this thread?

I think there is a use-case for "Withdrawn", it's more polite than
"Rejected" ;-).  But it's not a very high-priority request.

Status "Withdrawn" has now been added. 

--

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: CF app feature request
Next
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: Speeding up text_position_next with multibyte encodings