Re: [PROPOSAL] Temporal query processing with range types

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Moser <pitiz29a(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Johann Gamper <gamper(at)inf(dot)unibz(dot)it>, Michael Böhlen <boehlen(at)ifi(dot)uzh(dot)ch>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Anton Dignös <anton(dot)dignoes(at)unibz(dot)it>
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Temporal query processing with range types
Date: 2017-02-01 05:19:59
Message-ID: CAB7nPqRPONpczaEGQCZjVXNsLTabAar0m0AoRJR6Qx1q3mrR2w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Peter Moser <pitiz29a(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> [reviews and discussions]

The patch proposed has rotten. Please provide a rebase. By the way, I
am having a hard time applying your patches with patch or any other
methods... I am moving it to CF 2017-03 because of the lack of
reviews.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2017-02-01 05:22:22 Re: Vacuum: allow usage of more than 1GB of work mem
Previous Message Pavan Deolasee 2017-02-01 05:16:45 Re: Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)