Re: Stuart Bishop 2015-02-04
> > I don't think it's possible to get the necessary amount of changes
> > into testing. What we could probably do is to just remove it from
> > testing, and keep it in unstable for later updating.
> >
> > Stuart?
>
> It depends on what you consider necessary changes
On 4 February 2015 at 16:43, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Scott Kitterman 2015-02-04 <2026939.ppIJUsApvY@scott-latitude-e6320>
>> > > pgtune hasn't seen a new upstream release since about the medieval
>> > > ages, and the last git commit isn't very current either. The
>> > > postgresql.conf it pro
Re: Scott Kitterman 2015-02-04 <2026939.ppIJUsApvY@scott-latitude-e6320>
> > > pgtune hasn't seen a new upstream release since about the medieval
> > > ages, and the last git commit isn't very current either. The
> > > postgresql.conf it produces is worse than the defaults in some
> > > aspects, so
On Wednesday, February 04, 2015 12:33:02 Stuart Bishop wrote:
> On 3 February 2015 at 21:01, Christoph Berg
wrote:
> > Package: ftp.debian.org
> > Severity: normal
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > pgtune hasn't seen a new upstream release since about the medieval
> > ages, and the last git commit isn't very
On 3 February 2015 at 21:01, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Package: ftp.debian.org
> Severity: normal
>
> Hi,
>
> pgtune hasn't seen a new upstream release since about the medieval
> ages, and the last git commit isn't very current either. The
> postgresql.conf it produces is worse than the defaults in
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
Hi,
pgtune hasn't seen a new upstream release since about the medieval
ages, and the last git commit isn't very current either. The
postgresql.conf it produces is worse than the defaults in some
aspects, so people are rather harmed than helped by this tool
6 matches
Mail list logo
