On 3/25/16 3:54 PM, Artur Zakirov wrote: > On 25.03.2016 21:42, Dmitry Ivanov wrote: >> Sorry for the delay, I desperately needed some time to finish a bunch of >> dangling tasks. >> >> I've added some new comments and clarified the ones that were obscure. >> Moreover, I felt an urge to recheck most parts of the code since >> apparently >> nobody (besides myself) has gone so far yet. >> >> On 25.03.16 18:42 MSK, David Steele wrote: >>> Time is short and it's not encouraging that you say there is "still much >> work to be done". >> >> Indeed, I was inaccurate. I am more than interested in the positive >> outcome. >> > > I tested the patch and take a look on it. All regression tests passed. > The code looks good and the patch introduce a great functionality. > > I think the patch can be marked as "Ready for Commiter". But I do not > feel the force to do that myself. > > Also I agree with you about tsvector_setweight(). There is not a problem > with it because this weights are immutable and so there is not benefits > from new function.
Ideally Alexander can also look at it. If not, then you should mark it "ready for committer" since I doubt any more reviewers will sign on this late in the CF. -- -David da...@pgmasters.net -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
