On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 9:29 PM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: > This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is past due for your status update. Kindly send > a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your subsequent status > update. Refer to the policy on open item ownership: > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com
FYI, I spoke to Tom Lane about this at PGCon and suggested that he look at the proposed patch as I requested in https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+TgmobPqrAVXOBMHTcpDq8hX7gCzcVhoUvC8s9V=d09+bt...@mail.gmail.com and see whether that would address his concerns, and he said that he would do that. It may, however, have slipped his mind. My opinion is that something needs to be done about this patch. It needs to be improved or reverted. Improved would be ideal in my mind, but reverted is an outcome I can live with. -- 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
