bruce wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Tom Lane wrote: > > >> Peter has made it pretty clear that he didn't care for the > > >> refactorization aspect of that patch. > > > > > Peter asked why it was done, a good answer was given, and Peter did not > > > reply. > > > > Au contraire, he's reiterated since then that he didn't like it. > > The thread order was: patch, Peter comments, submitter gives reasons, > patch put in the queue, Peter comments again, I reply that the change is > not just "refactoring" but is needed based on submitters comments, and > no reply from Peter: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-08/msg00334.php > > Without a reply from Peter, I have to assume the patch is valid.
This is also an interesting example for a tracker. If we had one, all discussion on the patch would be in one place, but I am thinking that would require all posting to happen in a browser, or somehow have emails tagged to attach to each item. Is that something that can happen easily? I don't know. Would the repost of a patch be attached to the original submission? -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
