On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 7:11 PM, David Steele <da...@pgmasters.net> wrote:
> On 2/10/16 12:50 PM, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote: > > > PostgresProffesional cluster teams wants to propose new version of > > eXtensible Transaction Manager API. > > Previous discussion concerning this patch can be found here: > > > > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/f2766b97-555d-424f-b29f-e0ca0f6d1...@postgrespro.ru > > I see a lot of discussion on this thread but little in the way of > consensus. > > > The API patch itself is small enough, but we think that it will be > > strange to provide just API without examples of its usage. > > It's not all that small, though it does apply cleanly even after a few > months. At least that indicates there is not a lot of churn in this area. > > I'm concerned about the lack of response or reviewers for this patch. > It may be because everyone believes they had their say on the original > thread, or because it seems like a big change to go into the last CF, or > for other reasons altogether. > We'll prepare easy setup to play with our solutions, so any developers could see how it works. Hope this weekend we'll post something about this. > > I think you should try to make it clear why this patch would be a win > for 9.6. > Looks like discussion shifted to different thread, we'll answer here. > > Is anyone willing to volunteer a review or make an argument for the > importance of this patch? > > -- > -David > da...@pgmasters.net > >
