Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: dblink patches for comment

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
Cc: "Hackers (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: dblink patches for comment
Date: 2009-05-27 23:24:04
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> The attached addresses items#2 and 3 as listed by Bruce here:

> I think it is consistent with the discussions we had a PGCon last week. 
> Any objections to me committing this for 8.4?

It's hard to review it without any docs that say what it's supposed to do.
(And you'd need to patch the docs anyway, eh?)

> On a side note, should I try to address items #1 & #4 for 8.4 as well? 
> Perhaps #4 yes since it is arguably a bug fix, but no to #1?

Yeah, my feeling too.  #1 is a new feature that was submitted too late
for 8.4.  I wouldn't have argued if you'd committed it anyway during
the commitfest, but it's definitely too late now.  But #4 seems like
a bugfix.

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Jeff DavisDate: 2009-05-27 23:53:10
Subject: Re: User-facing aspects of serializable transactions
Previous:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2009-05-27 22:53:19
Subject: Positive build result on SuSE

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group