On 12/23/2015 05:45 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> Yeah, the last version of the patch dates of August, and there is >> visibly agreement that the information of pg_controldata provided at >> SQL level is useful while the data of pg_config is proving to be less >> interesting for remote users. Could the patch be rebased and split as >> suggested above? > > I am marking this patch as returned with feedback, there is not much > activity...
I just dusted this off yesterday finally. Anyway, based on the discussions I plan to: 1) split it into two separate patches, one for pg_config and one for pg_controldata. 2) Change the pg_controldata to be a bunch of separate functions as suggested by Josh Berkus rather than one SRF. Joe -- Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
