On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 2:08 AM, Joe Conway <m...@joeconway.com> wrote: > On 12/23/2015 05:45 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: >>> Yeah, the last version of the patch dates of August, and there is >>> visibly agreement that the information of pg_controldata provided at >>> SQL level is useful while the data of pg_config is proving to be less >>> interesting for remote users. Could the patch be rebased and split as >>> suggested above? >> >> I am marking this patch as returned with feedback, there is not much >> activity... > > I just dusted this off yesterday finally. Anyway, based on the > discussions I plan to: > > 1) split it into two separate patches, one for pg_config and one for > pg_controldata. > 2) Change the pg_controldata to be a bunch of separate functions as > suggested by Josh Berkus rather than one SRF.
This looks like a plan, thanks! -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
