| From: | <korryd(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Last minute mini-proposal (I know, I know)forPQexecf() |
| Date: | 2007-03-31 22:14:38 |
| Message-ID: | 1175379278.6784.62.camel@sakai.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> It's important to get the *right* interface into the first release
> that has it.
Agreed, that's why I proposed the right interface to begin with :-)
> The day before feature freeze is way too late for
> blue-sky design IMHO.
Ok, I can certainly bring this up again in the next release cycle. And
I can include my own private implementation in any client applications
until we have something similar in libpq.
> I note that the nominal schedule
> http://www.postgresql.org/developer/roadmap
> says that all major proposals should have been made and reviewed at
> least a month ago.
Consider me spanked... (and quit giggling Bruce).
-- Korry
--
Korry Douglas korryd(at)enterprisedb(dot)com
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2007-03-31 22:36:01 | Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout |
| Previous Message | Luke Lonergan | 2007-03-31 19:33:45 | Re: Oracle indemnifies PostgreSQL on its patents |