That was my feeling, but the author wasn't sure about the patch either, hence it was backed out.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Hermit Hacker wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jun 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Tom Lane wrote: > > > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > Patch applied. Thanks. > > > > > > > Michael A Nachbaur wrote: > > > >> Attached is a patch that provides *VERY* limited support for multiple slave > > > >> servers. I haven't tested it very well, so use at your own risk (and I > > > >> recommend against using it in production). > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > > > It sounded to me like that patch was intended for comment, not for > > > application. > > > > He said it wasn't all he wanted to do with the code, but that it did > > work. With so few rserv patches, it seems like something we should get > > in, but maybe not? Other comments? I am not sure myself. > > Considering how many ppl have commented in the past how rserv was broken > anyway ... ? I'd say it can't hurt anything ... > > -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
