On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Tom Lane<t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Greg Stark <gsst...@mit.edu> writes: >> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Tom Lane<t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> I'm also not prepared to push a large and unstable feature into the tree >>> on the hope that it will get fixed. > >> I didn't have the impression it had any known problems, Simon and >> others spent a lot of time testing it already. > > If it didn't have known problems it would have been committed in 8.4.
What I've seen of Heikki's work thus far has led me to believe that his reasons for rejecting the patch were good ones, but I don't specifically what they were. It would be helpful, I think, to reiterate them or repost links to the relevant messages in the archives; it would also be great if we could get an estimate of how close the patch is to being committable. Does it still need massive work, or is it getting fairly close, or what? Are the issues code cleanliness/maintainability, bugs, missing functionality? >From our conversations at the PGcon development meeting it seems as though there are a lot of people for whom this is a high-priority feature. Perhaps some of them will be willing to help if we give them enough information to work with. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
