Re: Snapshot synchronization, again...

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Snapshot synchronization, again...
Date: 2011-02-23 01:18:24
Message-ID: AANLkTi=3A2p9TyN7LSs1xt7UeJ1GOy1W5E_pT4a5Ph6y@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de> wrote:
> Both Tom and Robert voted quite explicitly against the
> store-in-shared-memory idea.

No, I voted *for* that approach.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-02-23 01:20:39 Re: Binary in/out for aclitem
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-02-23 01:12:38 Re: Binary in/out for aclitem