| From: | "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Andrew Chernow" <ac(at)esilo(dot)com>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] libpq type system 0.9a |
| Date: | 2008-04-09 01:43:26 |
| Message-ID: | b42b73150804081843h5fbe3494w778f5a8102fa47bf@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 8:06 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> I think a wise thing would be for the patch submitters to give a _basic_
> outline of what PQparam is trying to accomplish --- I mean like 10-20
> lines with a code snippet, or code snippet with/withouth PQparam. Right
> now there are too many people trying to guess. Of course, this should
> have been done at the start. I found this posting from August, 2007 but
> it isn't short/clear enough:
see [dated jan 8]:
http://www.mail-archive.com/pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org/msg102719.html
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-04-09 01:43:55 | Re: Concurrent psql patch |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-04-09 01:36:10 | Re: Concurrent psql patch |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-04-09 01:43:55 | Re: Concurrent psql patch |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-04-09 01:36:10 | Re: Concurrent psql patch |