Re: 8.2 features status

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 8.2 features status
Date: 2006-08-04 21:37:56
Message-ID: 1154727476.5223.11.camel@localhost
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 12:40 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> While I am not going to reopen the can of worms labeled 'bug tracker',
> I think it would be good to have a little more formality as far as
> claiming items goes.

> What say?

I think this is a good plan for adding additional process overhead, and
getting essentially nothing of value in return. I'm not convinced
there's a problem in need of solving here...

-Neil

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-08-04 21:40:55 Re: PGStatement#setPrepareThreshold
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-08-04 21:34:32 Re: Bug in sql_fmgr when envoked via copy