On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 2013-12-30 12:29:22 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote: >> But even if that wasn't >> true, I don't know why you feel the need to go on and on about buffer >> locking like this months later. Are you trying to be provocative? Can >> you *please* stop? > > ERR? Peter? *You* quoted a statement of mine that only made sense in > it's original context. And I *did* say that the point about buffer > locking applied to the *past* version of the patch.
Not so. You suggested it was a bug that needed to be fixed, completely independently of this effort. You clearly referred to the current code. "Yes, it it is different. But, in my opinion, bt_check_unique() doing so is a bug that needs fixing. Not something that we want to extend." -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
