On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:07:29 -0700 Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 16:50 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > I think this almost says it all. My particular gripe about this > > whole thing is that there are other features that are not too > > intrusive (or appear so anyway) that are easily more useful that > > are not being considered at all. Namely, > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-10/msg00087.php . > > That is NOT a good example. That patch is a first-cut of a non-trivial > optimizer feature that was submitted just before beta1 shipped, by > someone who hasn't modified the optimizer before. That is certainly a fair assertion and perhaps my point wasn't as clear as I wanted it to be. I in no way expect that we can or should have the inline-SQL-SRF patch for 8.3. I do however feel that the process should be equal for all and as the process wasn't followed it sets a bad precedent. > Jan's patch was a > contrib module that has been already developed by the Skype folks, and > it goes without saying that Jan has contributed to Postgres > extensively. > Then there is no reason for it to be in contrib is there? It can be on pgfoundry. > That said, I agree that the process should have been followed in this > case. Yep. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > > -Neil > > > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your > friend > -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature