2010/11/22 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>:
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote:
>> So, please, I know, so you and Tom are busy, but try to spend a few
>> time about this problem before you are definitely reject this idea.
>
> If I were to spend more time on this problem, what exactly would I
> spend that time doing and how would it help? If I were interested in
> spending time I'd probably spend it pursuing the suggestions Tom
> already made, and that's what I think you should do. But I'm not
> going to do that, because the purpose of the CommitFest is not for me
> to write new patches from scratch that do something vaguely similar to
> what a patch you wrote was trying to do. It's for all of us to review
> and commit the patches that have already been written. You aren't
> helping with that process, so your complaint that we aren't spending
> enough time on your patches would be unfair even if were true, and it
> isn't. The problem with your patch is that it has a design weakness,
> not that it got short shift.
ok, I can only recapitulate so this feature was proposed cca two
months ago, and minimally Tom and maybe you did agreement - with
request on syntax - do you remember? I am little bit tired so this
agreement was changed when I spent my time with this.
Pavel
>
> --
> Robert Haas
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>
