Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?")

From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?")
Date: 2003-04-19 09:22:49
Message-ID: 20030419172202.I40981-100000@houston.familyhealth.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Great. I think it can be made acceptable with little work.
>
> IIRC, the reason Jim's patch got bounced was exactly that it offered an
> implementation of only one policy, with no possibility of extension.

I read all the comments regarding Jim's patch, but would you mind stating
exactly what your concern is, Tom? What do you mean by 'one policy'?

Chris

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Devrim GUNDUZ 2003-04-19 11:04:21 Problem while ordering Turkish chars
Previous Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2003-04-19 09:21:46 Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?")