Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 06:15 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> > Hi,
> > On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 6:03 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > > That is exactly what I am against. Note the words "get rid of".
> > >
> > > This prevents parallel data transfer, use of split mirrors and various
> > > other techniques. It sounds neater, but it implies removal of useful
> > > features.
> > OK, ISTM that my description was confusing you, so I removed that statement
> > from the TODO item on wiki.
> > http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/NTT%27s_Development_Projects#Todo_and_Claim
> > Again, I'm not planning to get rid of any existing capabilities
> > unless necessary.
> That is not a caveat I will accept, a priori.
What does "accept" mean above? Are you the sole acceptor for this
feature? That is surprising to me.
You can say you would vote against it but your wording above seems
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Fujii Masao||Date: 2009-02-25 22:52:48|
|Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Start background writer during archive recovery.|
|Previous:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2009-02-25 21:43:54|
|Subject: Re: Hot standby, running xacts, subtransactions|