> On 19/11/2019, at 5:05 PM, Gareth Palmer <gareth@internetnz.net.nz> wrote:
>>
>> Since nobody has objected to this, I'm supposing that there's general
>> consensus that that design sketch is OK, and we can move on to critiquing
>> implementation details. I took a look, and didn't like much of what I saw.
Attached is an updated patch with for_locking_clause added, test-cases
re-use existing tables and the comments and documentation have been
expanded.
>> I'm setting this back to Waiting on Author.
