Received: from makus.postgresql.org (makus.postgresql.org [98.129.198.125]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C04E211ADB88; Sat, 7 Apr 2012 08:20:26 -0300 (ADT) Received: from gauss.credativ.com ([93.94.130.89]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SGTgu-0004qP-Mf; Sat, 07 Apr 2012 11:20:25 +0000 Received: from feivel (p4FE99698.dip.t-dialin.net [79.233.150.152]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mme@gauss.credativ.com) by gauss.credativ.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EA430550187; Sat, 7 Apr 2012 13:20:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: by feivel (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6D888A1198; Sat, 7 Apr 2012 13:20:08 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2012 13:20:08 +0200 From: Michael Meskes To: Boszormenyi Zoltan Cc: Noah Misch , Robert Haas , Michael Meskes , PG Hackers , Heikki Linnakangas , Bruce Momjian Subject: Re: ECPG FETCH readahead Message-ID: <20120407112008.GA2286@feivel.credativ.lan> Mail-Followup-To: Boszormenyi Zoltan , Noah Misch , Robert Haas , Michael Meskes , PG Hackers , Heikki Linnakangas , Bruce Momjian References: <4F538B4C.1030605@cybertec.at> <20120305185632.GE13348@tornado.leadboat.com> <4F55A9AD.6050600@cybertec.at> <20120306110658.GC15988@tornado.leadboat.com> <4F6D9893.3030300@cybertec.at> <20120329004323.GA17329@tornado.leadboat.com> <4F74409C.3050904@cybertec.at> <20120329170341.GA4142@tornado.leadboat.com> <4F74E6A7.8040204@cybertec.at> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F74E6A7.8040204@cybertec.at> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Archive-Number: 201204/335 X-Sequence-Number: 206138 On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 12:48:07AM +0200, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: > Attached is the new core feature patch. Summary of changes: > ... > I also refreshed the second patch that drives all cursors with the new > ... I'm slightly confused here. It seems Zoltan added a second patch *after* = Noah marked this patch as ready for committer. That second patch seems to appl= y cleanly after the first one got applied. Now, which one was reviewed and = is considered ready for commit? The first one? Or both?=20 Michael --=20 Michael Meskes Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) Michael at BorussiaFan dot De, Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org Jabber: michael.meskes at googlemail dot com VfL Borussia! For=C3=A7a Bar=C3=A7a! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, P= ostgreSQL