Re: WIP fix proposal for bug #6123

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP fix proposal for bug #6123
Date: 2012-08-08 14:26:41
Message-ID: 502230D102000025000494AC@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:

> Did we ever decide on this?

We discussed it to the point of consensus, and Tom wrote a patch to
implement that. Testing in my shop hit problems for which the cause
was not obvious. I don't know whether there is a flaw in the
designed approach that we all missed, a simple programming bug of
some sort in the patch, or pilot error on this end. It's on my list
of things to do, but it's hovering around 4th place on that list,
and new things seem to be appearing at the top of that list at about
the rate that I can clear them. :-(

> Is it a TODO?

We don't want to lose track of it, but with a pending patch to
debug, I'm not sure the TODO list is the right place to put it.

-Kevin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-08-08 14:35:24 Re: Bug in libpq implentation and omission in documentation?
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2012-08-08 11:32:47 Re: Bug in libpq implentation and omission in documentation?