On 3/4/17 8:33 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 3/3/17 16:16, David Steele wrote:
>> While this looks like it could be a really significant performance
>> improvement, I think the above demonstrates that it needs a lot of work.
>>  I know this is not new to the 2017-03 CF but it doesn't seem enough
>> progress has been made since posting to allow it to be committed in time
>> for v10.
>> I recommend moving this patch to the 2017-07 CF.
> I think the patch that was in 2017-01 was given some feedback that put
> the fundamental approach in question, which the author appeared to agree
> with.  So I don't know why this patch appeared in this CF at all.

Then it sounds like it should be marked RWF.  Haribabu can resubmit when
there's a new candidate patch.


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

Reply via email to