| From: | "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Joe Conway" <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql-patches reply-to (was Re: [PATCHES] selecting |
| Date: | 2006-08-17 16:30:17 |
| Message-ID: | 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCEA0FB39@algol.sollentuna.se |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
> > >>Ever since pgsql-patches replies started going to -hackers,
> > >>threading doesn't work anymore, so I for one can't tell what this
> > >>refers to at all.
> > >
> > >Yeah, that experiment hasn't seemed to work all that well for me
> > >either. Do you have another idea to try, or do you just want to
> > >revert to the old way?
> >
> > I'd vote for reverting to the old way. Anyone serious about hacking
> > should be on both lists.
Then why bother with two different lists?
If developers need to be on both list (which I beleive they do), and the
focus of both lists is developers, then why not just remove one of them
and get rid of the problem?
//Magnus
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-08-17 16:30:34 | Re: [HACKERS] selecting large result sets in psql using |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2006-08-17 16:09:31 | Re: pgsql-patches reply-to (was Re: [PATCHES] selecting |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-08-17 16:30:34 | Re: [HACKERS] selecting large result sets in psql using |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2006-08-17 16:09:31 | Re: pgsql-patches reply-to (was Re: [PATCHES] selecting |