| From: | "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com |
| Cc: | "Stefan Kaltenbrunner" <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "David Fetter" <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, "Greg Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Recovery Test Framework |
| Date: | 2009-01-12 21:02:36 |
| Message-ID: | 603c8f070901121302i1c5951b5x233c0b8febe40961@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> However I can say I would be fairly annoyed if everytime I checked
> hackers I was pulling down 5 megs in various patches.
Oh... really? I thought we were past the day when anyone cared how
large the attachments were.
At any rate, if we increased the limit from 100k to 1M, you could
conceivably get 5M if 5 huge patches had just been posted, but I doubt
it would happen every time you checked -hackers.
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2009-01-12 21:06:54 | Re: Recovery Test Framework |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2009-01-12 20:38:51 | Re: Recovery Test Framework |