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. -- -David da...@pgmasters.net -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
