>>> This might be way more than we want to do, but there is an article
>>> that describes some techniques for doing what seems to be missing
>> Even this would be doable, I'm afraid it may not fit in 9.3 if we
>> think about the current status of CF. So our choice would be:
>> 1) Postpone the patch to 9.4
>> 2) Commit the patch in 9.3 without Windows support
>> I personally am ok with #2. We traditionally avoid particular paltform
>> specific features on PostgreSQL. However I think the policiy could be
>> losen for contrib staffs. Also pgbench is just a client program. We
>> could always use pgbench on UNIX/Linux if we truely need the feature.
>> What do you think?
> Fair enough, I was just trying to point out alternatives. We have
> committed platform-specific features before now. I hope it doesn't
> just get left like this, though.
Yeah, I hope someone pick this up and propose as a TODO item. In the
mean time, I'm going to commit the patch without Windows support
unless there's objection.
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Jeff Davis||Date: 2013-01-17 01:38:38|
|Subject: Re: Enabling Checksums|
|Previous:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2013-01-17 01:34:41|
|Subject: Re: CF3+4|