On 11/24/2011 11:33 AM, Theo Schlossnagle wrote:
> I see the next steps being:
> 1) agreeing that a problem exists (I know one does, but I suppose
> consensus is req'd)
> 2) agreeing that "hooks" are the right approach, if not propose a
> different approach. (fwiw, it's incredible common)
> 3) reworking the implementation to fit in the project; I assume the
> implementation I proposed will, at best, vaguely resemble anything
> that gets integrated. It was just a PoC.
>
With this idea still being pretty new, and several of the people popping
out opinions in this thread being local--Theo, Stephen, myself--we've
decided to make our local Baltimore/Washington PUG meeting this month be
an excuse to hash some of this early stuff out a bit more in person, try
to speed things up . See
http://www.meetup.com/Baltimore-Washington-PostgreSQL-Users-Group/events/44335672/
if any other locals would like to attend, it's a week from today. (Note
that the NYC PUG is also having its meeting at the same time this month)
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg@2ndQuadrant.com Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.us
