On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Daniel Verite <daniel@manitou-mail.org> wrote:
>>> But worse than either of those things, there is no real
>>> agreement on what the overall design of this feature
>>> should be.
>>
>> The part in the design that raised concerns upthread is
>> essentially how headers sorting is exposed to the user and
>> implemented.
>>
>> As suggested in [1], I've made some drastic changes in the
>> attached patch to take the comments (from Dean R., Tom L.)
>> into account.
>> [ ... lengthy explanation ... ]
>> - also NULLs are no longer excluded from headers, per Peter E.
>> comment in [2].
>
> Dean, Tom, Peter, what do you think of the new version?
Is anyone up for re-reviewing this? If not, I think we're going to
have to reject this for lack of interest.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
