On 10/2/18, Michael Paquier wrote:
> v4 does not apply anymore. I am moving this patch to next commit fest,
> waiting on author.
v5 attached.
-John Naylor
From ea0a180bde325b0383ce7f0b3d48d1ce9e941393 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: John Naylor
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2018 12:52:07 +0700
Subject: [PAT
The previous patch doesn't work...
At Thu, 27 Sep 2018 22:00:49 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
wrote in
<20180927.220049.168546206.horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp>
> - 0001 to 0006 is rebased version of v4.
> - 0007 adds conditional locking to dshash
>
> - 0008 is the no-UDP st
On 2018/08/31 21:40, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> (2018/08/31 21:30), Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>> Thank you for taking care of that and for committing the patch. I have
>> now closed this issues on the open items list.
>
> Thanks!
I noticed that the CF entry for this was not closed. As of this morning,
Hi,
I agree that some clean up might be in order, but want to clarify a few
points.
On 2018/10/02 15:11, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The naming around partition related tuple conversions is imo worthy of
> improvement.
Note that tuple conversion functionality in tupconvert.c has existed even
Hi,
On 2018-09-28 15:36:00 +0530, Amit Khandekar wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Sep 2018 at 03:33, Andres Freund wrote:
> >
> > Hi Amit,
> >
> > Could you rebase this patch, it doesn't apply anymore.
>
> Thanks for informing. Attached are both mine and Amit Langote's patch
> rebased and attached ...
I wasn
Hi,
On 2018-10-02 16:18:19 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I agree that some clean up might be in order, but want to clarify a few
> points.
>
> On 2018/10/02 15:11, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > The naming around partition related tuple conversions is imo worthy of
> > improvement.
It seems the pach tester is confused by the addition of the
demonstration diff file. I'm reattaching just the patchset to see if
it turns green.
-John Naylor
From 107e3c8a0b65b0196ea4370a724c8b2a1b0fdf79 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: John Naylor
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2018 12:51:41 +0700
Subject: [PA
On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 04:11:54PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> I tried to close it as being committed, but couldn't do so, because I
> can't find Fujita-san's name in the list of committers in the CF app's
> drop down box that lists all committers.
Indeed, Fujita-san has been added to the list.
(2018/10/02 16:45), Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 04:11:54PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
I tried to close it as being committed, but couldn't do so, because I
can't find Fujita-san's name in the list of committers in the CF app's
drop down box that lists all committers.
Indeed,
On 2018/10/02 16:40, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> For executing them we have:
>>> - do_convert_tuple
>>> - ConvertPartitionTupleSlot
>>>
>>> which is two randomly differing spellings of related functionality,
>>> without the name indicating that they, for reasons, don't both use
>>> TupleConversionMap.
On 28/09/2018 09:35, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> That's certainly a good argument. Note that if we implemented that the
>> transaction timestamp is advanced inside procedures, that would also
>> mean that the transaction timestamp as observed in pg_stat_activity
>> would move during VACUUM, for exa
Hi,
I looked at the patch. Some comments.
On 2018/10/02 16:35, Andres Freund wrote:
> I wasn't quite happy yet with that patch.
>
> - ConvertTupleSlot seems like a too generic name, it's very unclear it's
> related to tuple mapping, rather than something internal to slots. I
> went for execut
Hi,
Here is an updated patch which adds some simple syntax for adding the
optimization barrier. For example:
WITH x AS MATERIALIZED (
SELECT 1
)
SELECT * FROM x;
Andreas
diff --git a/contrib/postgres_fdw/expected/postgres_fdw.out b/contrib/postgres_fdw/expected/postgres_fdw.out
index 21a2e
Re: Bossart, Nathan 2018-10-01 <69fd7e51-2b13-41fd-9438-17395c73f...@amazon.com>
> > 1. Do we really need two functions, one without input argument
> >to list the default tablespace?
> >I think that anybody who uses with such a function whould
> >be able to feed the OID of "pg_default".
Greetings,
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost writes:
> > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> >> Having said that, I'm fine with having it return NULL if the given
> >> attname matches an attisdropped column.
>
> > Ok, that's really all I was asking about.
>
> Ah, we we
Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Bossart, Nathan 2018-10-01
> <69fd7e51-2b13-41fd-9438-17395c73f...@amazon.com>
> > > 1. Do we really need two functions, one without input argument
> > > to list the default tablespace?
> > > I think that anybody who uses with such a function whould
> > > be
(2018/09/21 20:03), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
(2018/09/18 21:14), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
At Fri, 14 Sep 2018 22:01:39 +0900, Etsuro
Fujita wrote
in<5b9bb133.1060...@lab.ntt.co.jp>
I wrote a patch using
the Param-based approach, and compared the two approaches.
I don't think
there would be any w
On 26/09/2018 23:19, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> It’s not clear to me just how common it is to use GCC via homebrew on macOS.
I use that all the time.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
On 10/02/2018 08:00 AM, Laurenz Albe wrote:
Christoph Berg wrote:
Re: Bossart, Nathan 2018-10-01 <69fd7e51-2b13-41fd-9438-17395c73f...@amazon.com>
1. Do we really need two functions, one without input argument
to list the default tablespace?
I think that anybody who uses with such
On 01/10/2018 23:30, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>ssl_min_protocol_version = 'TLSv1'
>>ssl_max_protocol_version = ‘any'
>
> I don’t think ‘any’ is a clear name for a setting which means “the highest
> supported version”. How about ‘max_supported’ or something similar?
I can see the argumen
> On 2 Oct 2018, at 14:23, Peter Eisentraut
> wrote:
>
> On 01/10/2018 23:30, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> ssl_min_protocol_version = 'TLSv1'
>>> ssl_max_protocol_version = ‘any'
>>
>> I don’t think ‘any’ is a clear name for a setting which means “the highest
>> supported version”. How abo
On 28/09/2018 07:19, Michael Paquier wrote:
> +static bool cloning_ok = true;
> +
> +pg_log(PG_VERBOSE, "copying \"%s\" to \"%s\"\n",
> + old_file, new_file);
> +if (cloning_ok &&
> +!cloneFile(old_file, new_file, map->nspname, map->relname, true))
> +{
> +
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 26/09/2018 23:19, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> It’s not clear to me just how common it is to use GCC via homebrew on macOS.
> I use that all the time.
Hm, so did 5e2217131 break anything for you? Does that version of gcc
claim to know -F or -framework switches?
Hi,
Based on the current status of the open items and where we are at in the
release cycle, the date for the first release candidate of PostgreSQL 11
will be 2018-10-11.
If all goes well with RC1, the PostgreSQL 11.0 GA release will be
2018-10-18. This is subject to change if we find any issues d
Michael Paquier writes:
> Thanks to all who participated in the patch review, authoring, and
> everybody else who helped in making the different patches move forward.
Thanks for being CFM! I know it's a lot of work ...
regards, tom lane
Michael Paquier writes:
> My brain is rather fried for the rest of the day... But we could just
> be looking at using USE_ASSERT_CHECKING. Thoughts from other are
> welcome.
I'd go with folding the condition into a plain Assert. Then it's
obvious that no code is added in a non-assert build. I
On 10/02/2018 10:13 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier writes:
>> Thanks to all who participated in the patch review, authoring, and
>> everybody else who helped in making the different patches move forward.
>
> Thanks for being CFM! I know it's a lot of work ...
+10!
Joe
--
Crunchy Data
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 10:55:56AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 28/09/2018 09:35, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >> That's certainly a good argument. Note that if we implemented that the
> >> transaction timestamp is advanced inside procedures, that would also
> >> mean that the transaction time
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 11:21 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 10:07 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Amit Kapila writes:
> > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 9:38 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> (But it might be worth choosing slightly less
> > >> generic object names, to avoid a conflict against o
On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 09:32:10PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier writes:
> > On Mon, Sep 03, 2018 at 06:59:10PM -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> >> If you're going to keep this highly-simplified estimate, please expand the
> >> comment to say why it doesn't matter or what makes it hard to do
Hello,
I would like to know if there is some vacancy for Google Code-In mentor
with your organization this year.
I have prior experience in React, Javascript, Machine Learning, Deep
Learning, and Machine Learning. I have prior experience of open source and
working remotely. I hope to leverage these
Hi,
On 2018-10-02 10:55:56 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 28/09/2018 09:35, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >> That's certainly a good argument. Note that if we implemented that the
> >> transaction timestamp is advanced inside procedures, that would also
> >> mean that the transaction timestamp a
Noah Misch writes:
> On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 09:32:10PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> FWIW, my problem with this patch is that I remain unconvinced of the basic
>> correctness of the transform (specifically the unique-ification approach).
>> Noah's points would be important to address if we were movin
On 2018-09-28 09:35:48 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 26/09/2018 23:48, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > That's certainly a good argument. Note that if we implemented that the
> > transaction timestamp is advanced inside procedures, that would also
> > mean that the transaction timestamp as observ
Hi,
On 2018-10-02 17:28:26 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> On 2018/10/02 16:40, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I'm kinda wondering if we shouldn't have the tuple
> > conversion functions just use the slot based functionality in the back,
> > and just store those in the TupConversionMap.
>
> Sorry, I didn'
Stephen Frost writes:
> * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
>> OK, so here's a patch that I think does the right things.
>> I noticed that has_foreign_data_wrapper_privilege() and some other
>> recently-added members of the has_foo_privilege family had not gotten
>> the word about not failing o
Greetings,
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost writes:
> > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> >> OK, so here's a patch that I think does the right things.
> >> I noticed that has_foreign_data_wrapper_privilege() and some other
> >> recently-added members of the has_foo_pr
On 10/2/18, 7:22 AM, "Andrew Dunstan" wrote:
> On 10/02/2018 08:00 AM, Laurenz Albe wrote:
>> Christoph Berg wrote:
>>> Re: Bossart, Nathan 2018-10-01
>>> <69fd7e51-2b13-41fd-9438-17395c73f...@amazon.com>
> 1. Do we really need two functions, one without input argument
> to list the
Stephen Frost writes:
> * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
>> One might reasonably expect NULL there, but column_privilege_check
>> observes that you have table-level select privilege so it doesn't
>> bother to look up the column number. Not sure if this is worth
>> doing something about.
>
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 10:55 AM Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
>
> On 2018-Sep-26, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > > On 2018-Sep-26, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> I agree that it would be surprising for transaction timestamp to be newer
> > >> than statement timestamp. So for now at least, I'd
"Bossart, Nathan" writes:
> On 10/2/18, 7:22 AM, "Andrew Dunstan" wrote:
>> See the bottom of src/backend/catalog/system_views.sql starting around
>> line 1010.
> AFAICT the cleanest way to do this in system_views.sql is to hard-code
> the pg_default tablespace OID in the DEFAULT expression. S
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> On 09/29/2018 02:13 PM, Marco Atzeri wrote:
>> [ proposed patch ]
> Yes. So there are a couple of things here. First, the dll has
> SO_MAJORVERSION in the name. And second it stops building any static
> libraries and instead builds windows import libraries with names li
Hi,
Back in 2016 a patch was proposed to fix the O(N^2) performance on transactions
that generate many notifications. The performance issue is caused by the check
for duplicate notifications.
I have a feature built around LISTEN / NOTIFY that works perfectly well, except
for the enormous perfo
Marco Atzeri writes:
> [ cygwin-soversion.diff ]
Oh, one other minor comment on this patch: the rule for the "stlib"
must not be just
$(stlib): $(shlib) ;
Something like this would work:
$(stlib): $(shlib)
touch $@
See e.g. the AIX case in Makefile.shlib, which is doing about the
same
On 2018-10-02 18:35:29 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I looked at the patch. Some comments.
>
> On 2018/10/02 16:35, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I wasn't quite happy yet with that patch.
> >
> > - ConvertTupleSlot seems like a too generic name, it's very unclear it's
> > related to tuple ma
On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 03:52:20PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 01:50:23PM -0700, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > We are already in September, hence it is time to move on with the 2nd
> > commit fest for v12. As usual, there are many patches waiting for
> > review and integra
Hello,
I would like to know if there is a vacancy for becoming a Google Code-In
mentor with your organization this year.
I have prior experience in Java, Python, Android, React, React native, Deep
learning, Computer Vision, MySQL, PostgreSQL.
I have prior experience of open source and working remot
On 2018-10-02 11:02:37 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-10-02 18:35:29 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I looked at the patch. Some comments.
> >
> > On 2018/10/02 16:35, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > I wasn't quite happy yet with that patch.
> > >
> > > - ConvertTupleSlot seems lik
Amit Kapila writes:
>> Okay, I have pushed the test case patch on HEAD. Attached is the
>> code-fix patch, let's wait for a day so that we have all the results
>> which can help us to discuss the merits of this patch.
> By now, the added test has failed on gharial [1] with below log on the serve
Am 02.10.2018 um 19:07 schrieb Tom Lane:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
On 09/29/2018 02:13 PM, Marco Atzeri wrote:
[ proposed patch ]
Yes. So there are a couple of things here. First, the dll has
SO_MAJORVERSION in the name. And second it stops building any static
libraries and instead builds wind
Hi,
On 2018-09-26 21:30:25 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Here's a rebased version of <15785.1536776...@sss.pgh.pa.us>.
>
> I think we should try to get this reviewed and committed before
> we worry more about the float business. It would be silly to
> not be benchmarking any bigger changes against th
On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 7:55 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Amit Kapila writes:
> >> Okay, I have pushed the test case patch on HEAD. Attached is the
> >> code-fix patch, let's wait for a day so that we have all the results
> >> which can help us to discuss the merits of this patch.
>
> > By now, the added
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 05:23:28PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote:
>> If you're in a position where you're using Kerberos (or most other
>> things from the GSSAPI) for authentication, the encryption comes at
>> little to no additional setup cost. And then you get all the s
Here's a version of this patch rebased over commit 625b38ea0.
That commit's fix for the possibly-expensive memset means that we need
to reconsider performance numbers for this patch. I re-ran my previous
tests, and it's still looking like this is a substantial win, as it makes
snprintf.c faster t
Andres Freund writes:
> I've looked through the patch. Looks good to me. Some minor notes:
[ didn't see this till after sending my previous ]
> - How about adding our own strchrnul for the case where we don't
> HAVE_STRCHRNUL? It's possible that other platforms have something
> similar, and
On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:38 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Jimmy Yih writes:
> > Looking at the internal code (mostly get_from_clause_item() function), we
> > saw that when a subquery is used, there is no tuple descriptor passed to
> > get_query_def() function. Because of this, get_target_list() uses the
On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:07 AM Michael Banck wrote:
> I've attached v4 of the patch.
Hi Michael,
Windows doesn't like sigaction:
https://ci.appveyor.com/project/postgresql-cfbot/postgresql/build/1.0.15189
I'm not sure if we classify this as a "frontend" program. Should it
be using pqsignal()
On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 11:20 AM Pavel Stehule wrote:
> I hope so now, there are almost complete functionality. Please, check it.
Hi Pavel,
FYI there is a regression test failure on Windows:
plpgsql ... FAILED
*** 4071,4077
end;
$$ language plpgsql;
select stacked_diagnostics_test();
- NO
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 1:37 AM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > On 1 Oct 2018, at 01:19, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 10:51:44PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> You could have chosen something less complicated, like "ホゲ", which is
> >> the equivalent of "foo" in English. Any
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 10:29 PM Amit Langote
wrote:
> Attached is what I have at the moment.
I realise this is a WIP but FYI the docs don't build (you removed a
element that is still needed, when removing a paragraph).
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 02:31:35PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I can see the argument for that. But I don't understand where the
> automatic mode fits into this. I would like to keep all three modes
> from my patch: copy, clone-if-possible, clone-or-fail, unless you want
> to argue against t
On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 09:18:01PM +0900, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> In Debian /etc/ssl/openssl.cnf has been changed to
> "CiperString=DEFAULT@SECLEVEL=2", which implies that "RSA and DHE
> keys need to be at least 2048 bit long" according to the
> following page.
>
> https://wiki.debian.org/Conti
On 2018/10/03 8:31, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 10:29 PM Amit Langote
> wrote:
>> Attached is what I have at the moment.
>
> I realise this is a WIP but FYI the docs don't build (you removed a
> element that is still needed, when removing a paragraph).
Thanks Thomas for the he
Hi Andrew, Tom, all,
Over the thread for bug #14825 I posted some draft code to show one
way to save/restore the enum blacklist for parallel workers. Here's a
better version, and a new thread. 0001 is the code by Andrew Dustan
and Tom Lane that was reverted in 93a1af0b, unchanged by me except fo
On 2018-Oct-03, Michael Paquier wrote:
> There could be an argument for having an automatic more within this
> scheme, still I am not really a fan of this. When somebody integrates
> pg_upgrade within an upgrade framework, they would likely test if
> cloning actually works, bumping immediately on
On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 10:35:02PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I'm not clear what interface are you proposing. Maybe they would just
> use the clone-or-fail mode, and note whether it fails? If that's not
> it, please explain.
Okay. What I am proposing is to not have any kind of automatic mod
On 2018-Oct-03, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 10:35:02PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > I'm not clear what interface are you proposing. Maybe they would just
> > use the clone-or-fail mode, and note whether it fails? If that's not
> > it, please explain.
>
> Okay. What I a
On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 12:25 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Amit Kapila writes:
> >> Okay, I have pushed the test case patch on HEAD. Attached is the
> >> code-fix patch, let's wait for a day so that we have all the results
> >> which can help us to discuss the merits of this patch.
>
> > By now, the ad
On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 04:27:57PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> Yeah, maybe there is no reason to delay proceeding with
> pg_partition_children which provides a useful functionality.
So, I have been looking at your patch, and there are a couple of things
which could be improved.
Putting the new f
On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 2:24 PM Thomas Munro
wrote:
> Over the thread for bug #14825 I posted some draft code to show one
> way to save/restore the enum blacklist for parallel workers. Here's a
> better version, and a new thread. 0001 is the code by Andrew Dustan
> and Tom Lane that was reverted
On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 4:42 PM Thomas Munro
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 2:24 PM Thomas Munro
> wrote:
> > Over the thread for bug #14825 I posted some draft code to show one
> > way to save/restore the enum blacklist for parallel workers. Here's a
> > better version, and a new thread. 0001
On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 8:29 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 12:25 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Amit Kapila writes:
> > >> Okay, I have pushed the test case patch on HEAD. Attached is the
> > >> code-fix patch, let's wait for a day so that we have all the results
> > >> which can
On 28 September 2018 at 18:13, Edmund Horner wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Sep 2018 at 17:02, Edmund Horner wrote:
>> I did run pgindent over it though. :)
>
> But I didn't check if it still applied to master. Sigh. Here's one that
> does.
I know commit fest is over, but I made a pass of this to hopefu
On 2018-09-27 20:03:58 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-09-28 12:21:08 +1000, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
> > Here I attached further cleanup patches.
> > 1. Re-arrange the GUC variable
> > 2. Added a check function hook for default_table_access_method GUC
>
> Cool.
>
>
> > 3. Added a new hook va
On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 02:22:42AM +, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
> On 10/1/18, 7:07 PM, "Michael Paquier" wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 03:37:01PM +, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
>>> Without the find_all_inheritors() stuff, I think we would just need to
>>> modify the ANALYZE documentation patch
Hi!
> 2 окт. 2018 г., в 11:55, Michail Nikolaev
> написал(а):
>
> > Okay, it has been more than a couple of days and the patch has not been
> > updated, so I am marking as returned with feedback.
>
> Yes, it is more than couple of days passed, but also there is almost no
> feedback since 20
On 2018-10-02 17:54:31 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Here's a version of this patch rebased over commit 625b38ea0.
>
> That commit's fix for the possibly-expensive memset means that we need
> to reconsider performance numbers for this patch. I re-ran my previous
> tests, and it's still looking like th
Hi,
Thank you for the previous discussion while ago.
I’m afraid I haven't replied to all.
To move forward this development I attached a PoC patch.
I introduced a guc called shared_catacache_mem to specify
how much memory is supposed be allocated on the shared memory area.
It defaults to zero,
On Wed, Oct 03, 2018 at 10:54:14AM +0500, Andrey Borodin wrote:
> Let's move this to CF 2018-11? Obviously, it is WiP, but it seems that
> patch is being discussed, author cares about it.
If you are still working on it, which is not something obvious based on
the thread activity, then moving it t
79 matches
Mail list logo
