Re: New pg_lsn type doesn't have hash/btree opclasses

From: Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)dalibo(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: New pg_lsn type doesn't have hash/btree opclasses
Date: 2014-05-06 15:19:56
Message-ID: 5368FD9C.1060407@dalibo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 05/06/2014 04:59 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 05/06/2014 05:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>>> On 2014-05-06 09:37:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>> Sorry, it is *way* too late for 9.4.
>>
>>> It's imo a regression/oversight introduced in the pg_lsn patch. Not a
>>> new feature.
>>
>> You can argue that if you like, but it doesn't matter. It's too late
>> for
>> a change as big as that for such an inessential feature. We are in the
>> stabilization game at this point, and adding features is not the
>> thing to
>> be doing.
>
> FWIW, I agree with Andres that this would be a reasonable thing to
> add. Exactly the kind of oversight that we should be fixing at this
> stage in the release cycle.

I agree as well.

--
Vik

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2014-05-06 15:41:31 Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers
Previous Message Robert Haas 2014-05-06 15:09:54 Re: TABLESPACE and directory for Foreign tables?