* Simon Riggs (si...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> I gave you a quick response to let you know that HS need not be a
> blocker, for this release. If you are saying you have knowingly ignored
> a requirement for a whole year, then I am shocked. How exactly did you
> think this would ever be committed?

Erm, to be perfectly honest, I think the answer is probably "I was
busy.", and "no one provided any feedback on *how* to deal with it."
Given the amount of work that Kevin's put into this patch (which has
been beyond impressive, imv), I have a hard time finding fault with
him not getting time to implement a solution for Hot Standby for this.

As you say, it's not a blocker, I agree completely with that, regardless
of when it was identified as an issue.  What we're talking about is
right now, and right now is too late to fix it for HS, and to be
perfectly frank, fixing it for HS isn't required or even a terribly
important factor in if it should be committed.

I'll refrain from casting stones about issues brought up nearly a year
ago on certain other patches which are apparently not going to include
what I, at least, consider extremely important to PG acceptance by



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to