Robert Haas wrote:
> What I've seen of Heikki's work thus far has led me to believe that
> his reasons for rejecting the patch were good ones, but I don't
> specifically what they were. It would be helpful, I think, to
> reiterate them or repost links to the relevant messages in the
> archives; it would also be great if we could get an estimate of how
> close the patch is to being committable. Does it still need massive
> work, or is it getting fairly close, or what? Are the issues code
> cleanliness/maintainability, bugs, missing functionality?
This is where we left off:
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/49A64D16.8010105@enterprisedb.com
I was in the process of simplifying Simon's last patch, by removing the
concept of "recovery procs", and simplifying the association between
subxids and top xids is communicated to the slave. The above link
contains an experimental patch for that. The simplifications probably
left behind some more crud that can now be removed, or things that were
broken.
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
