[16:53] <rpadovani> launchpad on duckduckgo :D
[16:53] <rpadovani> https://duckduckgo.com/?q=lp+%231&ia=launchpad
[17:03] <cjwatson> rpadovani: says "More at Launchpad.com" which is a domainsquatter and not us.
[17:03] <cjwatson> but good to see explicit support
[17:05] <rpadovani> cjwatson, ops, I reported it in the MR, they didn't fix it :/ I report it to the developer
[17:05] <rpadovani> (again)
[17:06] <cjwatson> The link goes to the right place, it's just the text
[18:02] <cjwatson> wgrant: Do you happen to remember why accessartifact_maintain_denorm_to_artifacts_trig is redefined in database/schema/patch-2209-28-6.sql, apparently identically to its definition in database/schema/patch-2209-16-6.sql?  Is it because the PL/pgSQL function needs to be recompiled to refer to the new definition of accessartifact_denorm_to_artifacts?
[18:02] <cjwatson> (I'm guessing so, but wanted to check)
[18:04] <rpadovani> fixed launchpad.com on ddg
[18:04] <rpadovani> https://github.com/duckduckgo/zeroclickinfo-spice/pull/1423/files
[18:08] <cjwatson> thanks!
[22:52] <wgrant> cjwatson: Seems pretty pointless to me.
[23:09] <cjwatson> wgrant: OK, so PL/pgSQL PERFORM looks up the other function by name rather than having a precompiled handle to it or something?
[23:11] <wgrant> Oh right, I remember the history here.
[23:13] <wgrant> I can't see why the function was redefined, though. Might be worth deleting it from the patch and running the spec privacy tests.
[23:13] <wgrant> https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/1067616 ftr
[23:13] <mup> Bug #1067616: Blueprints could use a denormalized schema for improved performance <private-projects> <qa-ok> <regression> <specifications> <tech-debt> <Launchpad itself:Fix Released by stevenk> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1067616>
[23:13] <wgrant> I don't think I reviewed any of this series because reasons.
[23:13] <wgrant> Oh, I did.
[23:13] <wgrant> Just not the DB patch.
[23:15] <cjwatson> Yeah, I'd found that bug.
[23:15] <cjwatson> OK, will experiment if you don't know off the top of your head.
[23:21] <wgrant> cjwatson: lp.blueprints tests still pass with that removed, as expected.
[23:22] <cjwatson> Oh good.  Thanks.
[23:22] <wgrant> I would have been rather scared if they didn't.