From: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us (Tom Lane) |
Cc: | lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] v6.4.3 ? |
Date: | 1999-02-09 16:38:19 |
Message-ID: | 199902091638.LAA20421@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> "Thomas G. Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:
> > Personally, I would choose to post patches, since as you point out we
> > are really focused on v6.5beta. We *still* need a patch convention with
> > a .../patches/ directory shipped with Postgres, and with routines to
> > help create and apply the patches.
>
> The trouble with maintaining a pile of independent patches is that you
> have cross-patch dependencies: patch B fails to apply unless patch A
> was previously installed, or applies but fails to work right, etc etc.
> Worse, an installation reporting a problem might be running a slightly
> different set of patches than anyone else, complicating the diagnosis
> substantially.
My optimizer fix will not affect other patches. If we only have a few
patches, they will not bump into each other.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jan Wieck | 1999-02-09 18:38:10 | Re: AW: [HACKERS] Problems with >2GB tables on Linux 2.0 |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-02-09 16:35:20 | Re: [HACKERS] samekeys |