On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> In my opinion, Andrew's version is far clearer. Peter's version is
> full of jargon that I can't understand. I could probably figure it
> out with a few hours and a search engine, but that really shouldn't be
> necessary.
Really? Andrew's version doesn't even explain what excess-K is. Surely
that's obscure jargon that requires an explanation.
--
Peter Geoghegan
