On 3/24/16 10:21 AM, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
1) It's a great feature many users dream about.
Doesn't matter if it starts eating their data...
2) Patch is not very big.
3) Patch doesn't introduce significant infrastructural changes. It just
change some well-isolated placed.
It doesn't really matter how big the patch is, it's a question of "What
did the patch fail to consider?". With something as complicated as the
btree code, there's ample opportunities for missing things. (And FWIW,
I'd argue that a 51kB patch is certainly not small, and a patch that is
doing things in critical sections isn't terribly isolated).
I do think this will be a great addition, but it's just too late to be
adding this to 9.6.
(BTW, I'm getting bounces from a.lebe...@postgrespro.ru, as well as
postmaster@. I emailed i...@postgrespro.ru about this but never heard back.)
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org)
To make changes to your subscription: