Dear Hackers,
>
> We still have not decided on this point. The code corresponding to
> this part [1] has an open bug as well [2]. Based on the discussion
> here, I don't see we have a consensus with the current approach and
> even if we want to go with the current approach it seems that we need
> more work which needs further analysis. Alvaro, others, what is your
> take on this?
>
FYI, the point I raised [1] [2] seemed not to be fixed yet. Not sure it's the
last point we missed.
[1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/225003.1775571560%40localhost
[2]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1KWDbBk4FgbbWdivQLrPPzR4zgvfnHK4WjWC78rbuRVbg%40mail.gmail.com
Best regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED
