Re: Reworks for Access Control facilities (r2363)

From: KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp
Subject: Re: Reworks for Access Control facilities (r2363)
Date: 2009-10-15 01:21:27
Message-ID: 4AD67917.5000504@ak.jp.nec.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas wrote:
> 2009/10/13 KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>:
>> The attached patch is a revised one with the following updates:
>
> Despite two fairly explicit requests, this patch (and, with the
> exception of ECPG, only this patch) has not yet been reviewed by a
> committer.
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-10/msg00591.php
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-10/msg00652.php
>
> Are any of the committers willing to take a look at this? Tom?
> Alvaro, maybe? Bruce?

In actually, I cannot believe this patch to be perfectly commitable
by the 15-Oct due to the remaining time, but it is necessary to be
comittable at the head of the next commit fest.
In other word, I strongly want to continue the discussion and revising
the patch, even if it will be actually commited at the 15-Nov.

Thanks,
--
OSS Platform Development Division, NEC
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2009-10-15 01:24:18 Re: Buffer usage in EXPLAIN and pg_stat_statements (review)
Previous Message Robert Haas 2009-10-15 01:20:23 Re: CommitFest 2009-09, two weeks on