On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 6:31 PM, Daniel Ruggeri <[email protected]> wrote: > > @wrowe - I think the updated proposal addresses the concerns around the > optional processing. Would love if you can spare a few cycles before the > upcoming 2.4.26 to review and offer your +1 or at least nyx the -.5 note > in case that's deterring others.
Didn't want to hold up the train, I haven't had a chance to review but the most problematic issues are all addressed. Since I haven't reviewed, I'm not sure whether we are now taking the easy way out with unconditional direct bucket read line of the data, or still in an overly complicated filter injection, but that can all be treated as code simplification at another time. STATUS updated.
