On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Peter Geoghegan <p...@heroku.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>> That's because I believe this is quite broken, as already pointed out.
>> I think I like your approach better.
> That makes things far simpler, then.
>>> Your premise here is that what Heikki said in passing months ago is
>>> incontrovertibly the right approach. That's ridiculous. I think Heikki
>>> and I could work this out quite quickly, if he engaged, but for
>>> whatever reason he appears unable to. I doubt that Heikki thinks that
>>> about what he said, so why do you?
>> I don't -- I just think you could have sent a patch that addressed all
>> the other points, leave this one as initially submitted, and note that
>> the new submission left it unaddressed because you disagreed.
> I'll try to do that soon. I've got a very busy schedule over the next
> couple of weeks, though.
This patch was reviewed during CF 2016-01 and has not been updated for
CF 2016-03. I think we should mark it Returned with Feedback.
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com)
To make changes to your subscription: