Prev: BUG #4887: inclusion operator (@>) on tsqeries behaves not conforming to documentation
Next: idle in txn query cancellation
From: Simon Riggs on 19 Apr 2010 12:05 On Mon, 2010-04-19 at 11:19 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > If you think we're at the point where this item is the main thing > standing between us and beta, I'll go do something about it. I've > been waiting for the HS code to settle before trying to design a > solution... I'm not hugely interested in supporting HS in standalone backends. If it works, that's nice. If it doesn't then I suggest we don't hold up beta for it. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Simon Riggs on 19 Apr 2010 15:14
On Mon, 2010-04-19 at 14:34 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Anyone see any obvious holes in the idea? Nothing springs to mind, so worth a try. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers |