| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: reducing the overhead of frequent table locks - now, with WIP patch |
| Date: | 2011-06-08 16:44:48 |
| Message-ID: | BANLkTi=07-6ehMDFpGdTPrqJ7z9VL-Y86g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> As a result of this, I've been insulted, told I have no respect for
> process and even suggested there was a threat of patch war.
Well, you've pretty much said flat out you don't like the process, and
you don't agree with having a firm feature freeze. I think it's a
perfectly legitimate question to ask whether we're going to have to
continually relitigate that point. This is at least the second major
dust-up on this point since the end of 9.1CF4, and there were some
smaller ones, too.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-06-08 16:54:34 | Re: reducing the overhead of frequent table locks - now, with WIP patch |
| Previous Message | Andrew Chernow | 2011-06-08 16:44:37 | Re: Error in PQsetvalue |