Dear Hackers, > > We still have not decided on this point. The code corresponding to > this part [1] has an open bug as well [2]. Based on the discussion > here, I don't see we have a consensus with the current approach and > even if we want to go with the current approach it seems that we need > more work which needs further analysis. Alvaro, others, what is your > take on this? >
FYI, the point I raised [1] [2] seemed not to be fixed yet. Not sure it's the last point we missed. [1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/225003.1775571560%40localhost [2]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1KWDbBk4FgbbWdivQLrPPzR4zgvfnHK4WjWC78rbuRVbg%40mail.gmail.com Best regards, Hayato Kuroda FUJITSU LIMITED
