On Feb 25, 2010, at 11:29 AM, Alex Hunsaker wrote:
> Well that's the thing, probably by what I described below that. Namely
> get something working for 9.1 and after we know its good and solid see
> if we can back patch it. Unfeasible? If its really really simple and
> straight forward maybe we can find a -commiter willing to commit it
> sooner. But I'm dubious. I think the feeling between me and Tim is
> patching postgres is a last resort... Maybe if its to fix both sort
> {} and this it might be worth it. (That's at least how I parsed what
> you said :) ). Ill see if I can figure something out via straight
> Safe tonight.
I think Tom meant, what sorts of changes to PostgreSQL do you think might solve
the problem?
Best,
David
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
