| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: We do not need pg_promote_v4_to_v6_addr/mask |
| Date: | 2015-02-17 02:46:46 |
| Message-ID: | 26038.1424141206@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> On 02/16/2015 09:07 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> BTW, a bit of digging in the git logs and mail archives says that the code
>> in question was originally added in 7.4 (commit 3c9bb8886df7d56a), in
>> response to this discussion:
>> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/200309012156(dot)05874(dot)t(dot)maekitalo(at)epgmbh(dot)de
> Wow, talk about a walk down memory lane.
Tell me about it ;-). I was entirely astonished to discover that the
original author of the promote_v4_to_v6 code was moi.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2015-02-17 03:18:41 | Re: pg_basebackup -x/X doesn't play well with archive_mode & wal_keep_segments |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-02-17 02:34:57 | Re: Expanding the use of FLEXIBLE_ARRAY_MEMBER for declarations like foo[1] |