| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)oryx(dot)com> |
| Cc: | josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Ding-dong, contrib is dead ... |
| Date: | 2006-09-15 16:57:22 |
| Message-ID: | 3277.1158339442@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)oryx(dot)com> writes:
> At 2006-09-05 16:35:49 -0400, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us wrote:
>> So basically I don't see the point of investing effort in a
>> bug-compatible version of userlocks, when we can have something
>> cleaner and suitable for the long run with not very much more
>> effort.
> Fine with me. Two questions:
> - Where would the code live, if it were in core?
> - Shall I hack up the API you suggested in your earlier message?
Is this going anywhere? The days grow short ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2006-09-15 16:59:47 | Re: Optimize ORDER BY ... LIMIT |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-09-15 16:53:02 | Re: Optimize ORDER BY ... LIMIT |