Jan Wieck wrote:
> On 2/8/2007 3:32 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> > > Is this a new policy that after discussion, all patches must be 
> >> > > resubmitted with a summary and conclusions of the discussion? I can 
> >> > > certainly do that for you, but just tell me if you are going to ask 
> >> > > the 
> >> > > same from everyone.
> >> > 
> >> > No, I am asking only this time because I feel there was too much
> >> > disconnect between the patch and the extensive replication discussion
> >> > that few community members would see the connection.
> >> 
> >> FYI, in my opinion the trigger addition is clearly useful to Mammoth
> >> Replicator as well.  In fact, it's so obviously useful that I didn't see
> >> a need to state that in the original thread where it was discussed.
> > 
> > Right, I know it is useful too, but I would like a layout of what it
> > does and why so everyone is clear on it.
> I have no clue what got you into what you are doing here. But that shall 
> not be my real concern. If you feel the need to do this sort of thing, 
> be my guest. I will add the remaining changes to pg_rewrite, including 
> the new support commands and changes to psql as well as pg_dump and 
> resubmit the new patch with explanations that will hopefully help you to 
> comprehend what and how this relatively small and fully backward 
> compatible change in the trigger and rule firing mechanism will work and 
> what existing problems it will solve.

Yep, that's what I want everyone to see.  This is standard procedure for
everyone in the community, and core is not immune.

  Bruce Momjian  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>          http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                               http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
       choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not

Reply via email to