| From: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgbench--new transaction type |
| Date: | 2012-07-16 01:22:36 |
| Message-ID: | CAEYLb_Xx+EEH1-htr8cWdAwYJKAttFTEczk1-wMAUJq3hHszkQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 1 June 2012 01:02, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Sorry it has taken me a year to get back to this patch. I have wanted
> to use it, and to ask other people to run it and report their results,
> several time recently, so I would like to get it into the core.
Who marked this patch as rejected in the commitfest app? Why?
It would be nice if this information was automatically posted as a
"comment". Surely if a patch is rejected, there should be at least a
one-line explanation.
--
Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-07-16 01:37:41 | Re: [PERFORM] DELETE vs TRUNCATE explanation |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-07-16 01:22:28 | Re: Closing out the June commitfest |