(Just remembered to remove pgsql-committers here).

On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:21 PM, Christian Ullrich <ch...@chrullrich.net> wrote:
> * Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Christian Ullrich <ch...@chrullrich.net>
>> wrote:
>>> * Michael Paquier wrote:
>>>> In order to avoid any problems with the load and unload windows, my
>>>> bet goes for 0001, 0002 and 0003, with the last two patches merged
>>>> together, 0001 being only a set of independent fixes. That's ugly, but
>>>> that looks the safest course of actions. I have rebased/rewritten the
>>>> patches as attached. Thoughts?
>>> In lieu of convincing you to drop the entire thing, yes, that looks about
>>> right, except for the BOOL thing.
>> Yes, right. Thanks. Patch 0001 is definitely something that should be
>> applied and backpatched, the CloseHandle() call is buggy. Now 0002 and
>> 0003 are improving things, but there have been no reports regarding
>> problems in this area, so this could just be applied to master I
>> guess. Christian, does that sound right?
> Yes.

OK, let's get to the next step of the game and get a committer to look
at this patch.

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to