Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 5 Oct 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Not really, it was still up in the air I thought. However, the
>> discussion will become moot if we don't have an implementation
>> of the faster-checking alternative to look at pretty soon. Do you
>> have something nearly ready to show?
> It's not cleaned up, but yes. It appears to work for the simple tests I've
> done and should fall back if the permissions don't work to do a single
> query on both tables.
Okay, I'll look this over, make any improvements I can think of, and
post another version in a couple of hours. One thing I can see I'd
like to do is merge the error-reporting code with the main line, so
that there's not any difference in the output format (I don't like
the induced change in the regression test outputs...)
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
