2013/1/19 Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net>: > Pavel, > > While I certainly appreciate your enthusiasm, I don't think this is > going to make it into 9.3, which is what we're currently focused on. > > I'd suggest that you put together a wiki page or similar which > outlines how this is going to work and be implemented and it can be > discussed for 9.4 in a couple months. I don't think writing any more > code is going to be helpful for this right now.
if we don't define solution now, then probably don't will define solution for 9.4 too. Moving to next release solves nothing. Personally, I can living with commiting in 9.4 - people, who use it and need it, can use existing patch, but I would to have a clean proposition for this issue, because I spent lot of time on this relative simple issue - and I am not happy with it. So I would to write some what will be (probably) commited, and I don't would to return to this open issue again. Regards Pavel > > Thanks, > > Stephen -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
