Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> writes:
> I don't object to the addition of this patch in next CF as this
> presents no new concept. Still per the complications this patch and
> because it is a complicated patch I was wondering if people are fine
> to include it in this last CF.
The March CF is already looking pretty daunting. We can try to include
this but I won't be too surprised if it gets punted to a future CF.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
