Re: ProcessUtility_hook

From: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ProcessUtility_hook
Date: 2009-12-09 03:12:07
Message-ID: 4B1F1587.2080301@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

It looks like the last round of issues on this patch only came from
Tom's concerns, so I'm not sure if anyone but Tom (or a similarly picky
alternate committer) is going to find anything else in a re-review. It
looks to me like all the issues were sorted out anyway. Euler, you're
off the hook for this one; it looks "ready for committer" to me.

--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com www.2ndQuadrant.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tatsuo Ishii 2009-12-09 03:30:50 Re: [PATCH] Windows x64 [repost]
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2009-12-09 03:11:10 Re: YAML Was: CommitFest status/management