From: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com |
Subject: | Re: ALTER TABLE ... REPLACE WITH |
Date: | 2011-01-20 01:57:56 |
Message-ID: | 20110120015756.GD10367@tornado.leadboat.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 08:55:22PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 7:57 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 17:46 -0500, Noah Misch wrote:
> >
> >> I'll go ahead and mark the patch Returned with Feedback.
> >
> > My understanding of the meaning of that is polite rejection. If you do
> > that there is no further author comment and we move to July 2011. That
> > then also rejects your own patch with what you say is an alternative
> > implementation...
> >
> > Is that what you wish? That isn't what I wish, either way. I suggest you
> > mark it Waiting on Author, so we can discuss it further.
>
> Simon,
>
> I have no idea what you're talking about here. It is entirely fitting
> and appropriate to reject a patch the guts of which have not been
> written four days into the final CommitFest. Doing so does not
> somehow reject Noah's patches, which stand or fall on their own
> merits.
I think Simon was referring to the proof-of-concept sketch I had included with
my review.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2011-01-20 01:58:49 | Re: REVIEW: WIP: plpgsql - foreach in |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-01-20 01:56:31 | Re: REVIEW: WIP: plpgsql - foreach in |