Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> One reason for making it contrib is that I don't think you've got it
>> entirely right yet, and there will be several iterations before it
>> settles down. In a contrib module that is no problem, in core it's a
>> forced initdb each time.
> Yeah - certainly less intrusive as a contrib if amendments are required!
> Barring a huge groundswell of support for it in core :-) I will resubmit
> a patch for it as a contrib module.
And here it is...
In response to
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2005-03-09 03:52:09|
|Subject: Re: Where to see the patch queue (was Re: [PATCHES] Patch|
|Previous:||From: Neil Conway||Date: 2005-03-09 00:09:16|
|Subject: trivial refactoring of WaitOnLock|