Re: reducing the overhead of frequent table locks - now, with WIP patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 6:33 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Joshua Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
>> As long as we have solidarity of the committers that this is not allowed, however, this is not a real problem.  And
itappears that we do.  In the future, it shouldn't even be necessary to discuss it. 
>
> Solidarity?
>
> Simon - who was a committer last time I checked - seems to think that
> the current process is entirely bunko.

I'm not sure why anyone that disagrees with you should be accused of
wanting to junk the whole process. I've not said that and I don't
think this.

Before you arrived, it was quite normal to suggest tuning patches
after feature freeze.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: SIREAD lock versus ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: SIREAD lock versus ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock