On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Shigeru HANADA
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 20:30:05 +0900
>> Shigeru HANADA wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 11:33:25 -0500
>>> Robert Haas wrote:
>>> > Is anyone actually working on a new version
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Shigeru HANADA
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 20:30:05 +0900
> Shigeru HANADA wrote:
>
>>
>> On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 11:33:25 -0500
>> Robert Haas wrote:
>> > Is anyone actually working on a new version of this patch sufficiently
>> > rapidly that we can expect a new
On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 11:33:25 -0500
Robert Haas wrote:
> Is anyone actually working on a new version of this patch sufficiently
> rapidly that we can expect a new version in the next day or two?
>
> If not, I think we mark this one Returned with Feedback and revisit it for
> 9.2.
I'm working on
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas writes:
>> I needed something to test the FDW API patch with, and didn't want to
>> get involved in the COPY API changes, and also wanted to have something
>> that needs real connection management and can push down quals. So I
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> I needed something to test the FDW API patch with, and didn't want to
> get involved in the COPY API changes, and also wanted to have something
> that needs real connection management and can push down quals. So I
> updated the postgresql_fdw patch to work with the
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 3:52 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> I needed something to test the FDW API patch with, and didn't want to get
> involved in the COPY API changes, and also wanted to have something that
> needs real connection management and can push down quals. So I updated the
> postgresql
