On 2013-11-12 19:24:39 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2013-11-12 13:18:19 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Andres Freund
> > wrote:
> > > Completely agreed. As evidenced by the fact that the current change
> > > doesn't update all relevant comments & code. I wonde
On 2013-11-12 13:18:19 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Andres Freund
> wrote:
> > Completely agreed. As evidenced by the fact that the current change
> > doesn't update all relevant comments & code. I wonder if we shouldn't
> > leave the function the current way and
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Completely agreed. As evidenced by the fact that the current change
> doesn't update all relevant comments & code. I wonder if we shouldn't
> leave the function the current way and just add a new function for the
> new behaviour.
> The hard
Hi,
On 2013-11-12 12:13:54 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Andres Freund
> wrote:
> > [ updated patch-set ]
>
> I'm pretty happy with what's now patch #1, f/k/a known as patch #3,
> and probably somewhere else in the set before that. At any rate, I
> refer to 0001-
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> [ updated patch-set ]
I'm pretty happy with what's now patch #1, f/k/a known as patch #3,
and probably somewhere else in the set before that. At any rate, I
refer to 0001-wal_decoding-Add-wal_level-logical-and-log-data-requ.patch.gz.
I th
