On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> My only objection to that is that if we're going to add attoptions >> also, I'd like to get this committed first before I start working on >> that, and we're running short on time. If you can commit his patch in >> the next day or two, then I am fine with rebasing mine afterwards, but >> if it needs more work than that then I would prefer to commit mine so >> I can move on. Is that reasonable? > > Fair enough --- if I can't get it done today I will let you know and > hold off.
OK. I just took a really fast look at that the bki patch and it looks pretty nice, so I hope you're able to get it in. Of course, I'm biased because it's based on earlier work of my own, but biased != wrong. :-) A lot more work will need to be done to escape the insanity that is our current method of handling system catalogs, but this seems like a good step in the right direction. I also observe that it applies cleanly over my current spcoptions branch, so the merge conflicts might be a non-issue. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
