Re: Reworks for Access Control facilities (r2363)

From: KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp
Subject: Re: Reworks for Access Control facilities (r2363)
Date: 2009-10-16 02:13:00
Message-ID: 4AD7D6AC.7090009@ak.jp.nec.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 1:22 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Maybe if I weren't burned out after a month of CommitFesting, I could
>> muster a more positive reaction, but right now I just can't summon any
>> enthusiasm for this.
>
> Based on this review, I am marking this patch Rejected.

Basically, I need to agree in spite of Stephen's efforts.

> For what it's worth, I took a quick look at this just to see if I had
> any reason to disagree with your conclusions. I don't.

Sorry, please make clear the "your conclusions"?

Does it mean that Tom's comment that this reworking does not go into
the right direction? Or, my comment on the last message?

Thanks,
--
OSS Platform Development Division, NEC
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Sabino Mullane 2009-10-16 03:44:35 DELETE not seeing expected rows before COPY on 8.4.1
Previous Message Robert Haas 2009-10-16 01:58:47 CommitFest 2009-09 is closed