On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:07:29 -0700
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 16:50 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > I think this almost says it all. My particular gripe about this
> > whole thing is that there are other features that are not too
> > intrusive (or appear so anyway) that are easily more useful that
> > are not being considered at all. Namely,
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-10/msg00087.php .
> That is NOT a good example. That patch is a first-cut of a non-trivial
> optimizer feature that was submitted just before beta1 shipped, by
> someone who hasn't modified the optimizer before.

That is certainly a fair assertion and perhaps my point wasn't as
clear as I wanted it to be. I in no way expect that we can or should
have the inline-SQL-SRF patch for 8.3.

I do however feel that the process should be equal for all and as
the process wasn't followed it sets a bad precedent. 

> Jan's patch was a
> contrib module that has been already developed by the Skype folks, and
> it goes without saying that Jan has contributed to Postgres
> extensively.

Then there is no reason for it to be in contrib is there? It can be on

> That said, I agree that the process should have been followed in this
> case.



Joshua D. Drake

> -Neil
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your
> friend


      === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564   24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997  http://www.commandprompt.com/
                        UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to