Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAM3SWZRxjYPS8G2TS8NbbcZaWcQ9jn_L-3yqGQDrOqQMw98vGA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization) (Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >> You're >> essentially leveraging a commit bit that you haven't used in more than >> three years to try to push a patch that was submitted months too late > > > I'm not leveraging anything any I'm not going to push something unless > people are on board. That's *why* I sent that message. And I started > the email by saying I was going to go work on patches from the > commitfest first. Exactly. I was of the opinion, as some familiar with the subject matter, that this rose to the level of deserving special consideration. I'm glad that there does seem to be a general recognition that such a category exists. Given the reservations of Robert and others, this isn't going to happen for 9.4. It was never going to happen under a cloud of controversy. I only broached the idea. Special consideration is not something I ask for lightly. I must admit that it's hard to see things as I do if you aren't as familiar with the problem. I happen to think that this is the wrong decision, but I'll leave it at that. I'm sure that whatever we come up with for 9.5 will be a lot better than what I have here, because it will probably be generalized to other important cases. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: