On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 07:06 -0700, David Fetter wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 09:52:46AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> > David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> writes: >> > > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 09:14:42AM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: >> > >> I don't see anything has stalled. >> > >> > > I do. We're half way through this commitfest, so if no one's >> > > actually ready to commit one of the patches, I kinda have to >> > > bounce them both, at least to the next CF. >> > >> > [ raised eyebrow ] You seem to be in an awfully big hurry to bounce >> > stuff. The CF end is still two weeks away. >> >> If people are still wrangling over the design, I'd say two weeks is >> a ludicrously short time, not a long one. > > Yes, there is design work still to do. > > What purpose would be served by "bouncing" these patches?
None whatsoever, IMHO. That having been said, I would like to see us make some forward progress. I'm open to your ideas expressed up-thread, but I'm not sure whether they'll be sufficient to resolve the problem. Seems worth a try, though. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
