Re: Refactoring speculative insertion with unique indexes a little - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: Refactoring speculative insertion with unique indexes a little
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZRmc3n_cROEbihR8UeNR6vpCxdF-Nhd3jcDp6rK18285Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Refactoring speculative insertion with unique indexes a little  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Refactoring speculative insertion with unique indexes a little  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Re: Refactoring speculative insertion with unique indexes a little  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> There hasn't been a new version of this patch in 9 months, you're
> clearly not in a hurry to produce one, and nobody else seems to feel
> strongly that this is something that needs to be done at all.  I think
> we could just let this go and be just fine, but instead of doing that
> and moving onto patches that people do feel strongly about, we're
> arguing about this.  Bummer.

I'm busy working on fixing an OpenSSL bug affecting all released
versions right at the moment, but have a number of complex 9.6 patches
to review, most of which are in need of support. I'm very busy.

I said that I'd get to this patch soon. I might be kicking the can
down the road a little with this patch; if so, I'm sorry. I suggest we
leave it at that, until the CF is almost over or until I produce a
revision.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Vitaly Burovoy
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Integer overflow in timestamp[tz]_part() and date/time boundaries check
Next
From: Vitaly Burovoy
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Integer overflow in timestamp[tz]_part() and date/time boundaries check