Oops, thank for remind !
On Sat, 12 Feb 2011, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> writes:
>> btree_gist is essentially required for exclusion constraints to be
>> useful in a practical way.
>> In fact, can you submit it for the next commitfest to be included in
>> core? That would allow range types and exclusion constraints to be used
>> out-of-the-box in 9.2.
>> Only if you think it's reasonable to put it in core, of course. If
>> extensions are easy enough to install, maybe that's not really
> btree_gist is entirely unready to be included in core.
> regards, tom lane
Oleg Bartunov, Research Scientist, Head of AstroNet (www.astronet.ru),
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University, Russia
Internet: oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(495)939-16-83, +007(495)939-23-83
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2011-02-12 21:55:53|
|Subject: Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling |
|Previous:||From: Dimitri Fontaine||Date: 2011-02-12 21:46:30|
|Subject: Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage|
pgsql-rrreviewers by date
|Next:||From: Ibrar Ahmed||Date: 2011-02-16 15:16:03|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] reviewers needed!|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2011-02-12 21:45:16|
|Subject: Re: btree_gist (was: CommitFest progress - or lack thereof) |