Prev: [HACKERS] Using Small Size SSDs to improve performance?
Next: [HACKERS] Two different methods of sneaking non-immutable data into an index
From: "Kevin Grittner" on 4 Aug 2010 17:13
Michael Meskes <michael(a)fam-meskes.de> wrote:

> I'd consider this a bug.

Could you explain why? The assertions that people consider it a bug
without explanation of *why* is confusing for me.

It sounds more like a feature of the ECPG interface that people
would really like, and which has been technically possible since
PostgreSQL 8.3, but for which nobody submitted a patch until this
week. There was some hint that a 9.0 ECPG patch added new features
which might make people expect this feature to have also been added.
If this patch isn't necessarily correct, and would be dangerous to
apply at this point, should the other patch be reverted as something
which shouldn't go out without this feature?

-Kevin

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: [HACKERS] Using Small Size SSDs to improve performance?
Next: [HACKERS] Two different methods of sneaking non-immutable data into an index