| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)mail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Review of Row Level Security |
| Date: | 2013-03-25 03:43:23 |
| Message-ID: | CA+U5nMLtQ6ycY=K-Y8q0Khim5_gkK8HeCAqvxtHbT847N=pPyQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 19 March 2013 15:08, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> wrote:
> It is much helpful if someone give me comments around these
> arguable portions from the standpoint with fresh eyes.
My feeling at this point is that I don't think I should commit this
and related patches without more work.
I certainly have time and willingness to do that in the next release
cycle, but I feel like we need substantially longer to confirm that
this is as rock solid as it needs to be.
With everybody's permission, I'd like to move this to the next CF,
with apologies to KaiGai.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2013-03-25 04:08:29 | Re: Request for vote to move forward with recovery.conf overhaul |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2013-03-25 03:34:22 | Re: Limiting setting of hint bits by read-only queries; vacuum_delay |