Robert Haas wrote: > > I offered to review it. ?I was going to mostly review the parts that > > impacted our existing code, and I wasn't going to be able to do a > > thorough job of the SE-Linux-specific files. > > Review it and commit it, after making whatever modifications are > necessary? Or review it in part, leaving the final review and commit > to someone else? > > I just read through the latest version of this patch and it does > appear to be in significantly better shape than the versions I read > back in July. So it might not require a Herculean feat of strength to > get this in, but I still think it's going to be a big job. There's a > lot of code here that needs to be verified and in some cases probably > cleaned up or restructured. If you're prepared to take it on, I'm not > going to speak against that, other than to say that I think you have > your work cut out for you.
This is no harder than many of the other seemingly crazy things I have done, e.g. Win32 port, client library threading. If this is a feature we should have, I will get it done or get others to help me complete the task. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
