|From:||Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>|
|To:||Thom Brown <thombrown(at)gmail(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org|
|Subject:||Re: Command Triggers, v16|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On Thursday, March 15, 2012 11:41:21 PM Thom Brown wrote:
> On 15 March 2012 22:06, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr> wrote:
> > Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> writes:
> >>> At this moment in time, CTAS is still outstanding. Is the plan to try
> >>> to get that in for this release, or as an enhancement in 9.3?
> >> The plan is to get CTAS as a utility command in 9.2 then update the
> >> command trigger patch to benefit from the new situation. We've been
> >> wondering about making its own commit fest entry for that patch, it's
> >> now clear in my mind, that needs to happen.
> > https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=823
> Looks like the ctas-on-command-triggers-01.patch patch needs re-basing.
I can do that - but imo the other patch (not based on the command triggers
stuff) is the relevant for now as this patch ought to be applied before
command triggers. It doesn't seem to make too much sense to rebase it
frequently as long as the command triggers patch isn't stable...
Any reason you would prefer it being rebased?
|Next Message||Christian Ullrich||2012-03-16 08:30:33||Re: Command Triggers, v16|
|Previous Message||Yeb Havinga||2012-03-16 07:44:17||Re: [v9.2] Add GUC sepgsql.client_label|