On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Checksums patch isn't sucking much attention at all but admittedly > there are some people opposed to the patch that want to draw out the > conversation until the patch is rejected,
Wow. Sounds like a really shitty thing for those people to do - torpedoing a perfectly good patch for no reason. I have an alternative theory, though: they have sincere objections and don't accept your reasons for discounting those objections. > I'm not sure how this topic is even raised here, since the patches are > wholly and completely separate, apart from the minor and irrelevant > point that the patch authors both work for 2ndQuadrant. If that > matters at all, I'll be asking how and why. It came up because Josh pointed out that this patch is, in his opinion, in better shape than the checksum patch. I don't believe anyone's employment situation comes into it. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
