Re: PROC_IN_ANALYZE stillborn 13 years ago
От | James Coleman |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PROC_IN_ANALYZE stillborn 13 years ago |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAAaqYe-uWxk4KFFwET99COfCj9czi6ZFJGQTvi3bxw04C-ek6Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PROC_IN_ANALYZE stillborn 13 years ago (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 8:06 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > I pushed despite the objection because it seemed that downstream > > discussion was largely favorable to the change, and there's a different > > proposal to solve the bloat problem for analyze; and also: > > Note that this quasi-related patch has pretty thoroughly hijacked > the CF entry for James' original docs patch proposal. The cfbot > thinks that that's the latest patch in the original thread, and > unsurprisingly is failing to apply it. > > Since the discussion was all over the place, I'm not sure whether > there's still a live docs patch proposal or not; but if so, somebody > should repost that patch (and go back to the original thread title). I replied to the original email thread with reposted patches. James
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: