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

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Fabrízio Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <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: 2014-05-09 23:37:43
Message-ID: CAB7nPqRHUMSQWOyEViPGzcm2B7fREqJKucZugTU6+azxY4cAgA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 10:49 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Yes unless many people object the commit.
>
> Michael,
> You're now modifying the patch?
Not within a couple of days.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2014-05-09 23:42:39 Re: New pg_lsn type doesn't have hash/btree opclasses
Previous Message Tom Lane 2014-05-09 23:25:17 Re: Commitfest still shows pending patches?