Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D6D66501C9
	for <pgsql-patches-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:16:47 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 79248-01-9 for
	<pgsql-patches-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:16:39 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D823C6501E7
	for <pgsql-patches@postgresql.org>;
	Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:16:17 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m6LKGDpS017232;
	Mon, 21 Jul 2008 16:16:13 -0400 (EDT)
To: Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM>
cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com>,
	Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>,
	PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: page macros cleanup (ver 04) 
In-reply-to: <4884E13D.3070109@sun.com> 
References: <48529B83.9010907@sun.com>
	<2e78013d0807030450m4cab60d0jd99d1acce59fae56@mail.gmail.com>
	<486DD1D1.50604@sun.com>
	<2e78013d0807040150w393ad72codaf06a6ac12a83ce@mail.gmail.com>
	<486DF644.4070604@enterprisedb.com>
	<2e78013d0807040350m3b2913cfkceaa70d8f9d697c2@mail.gmail.com>
	<486E01B0.9050100@enterprisedb.com>
	<2e78013d0807040404q5ff7f7faq9f87a39e0f0552fa@mail.gmail.com>
	<486E138F.4060900@sun.com> <4874A6E0.9070909@enterprisedb.com>
	<13370.1215975739@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4884E13D.3070109@sun.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM>
	message dated "Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:19:25 +0200"
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 16:16:13 -0400
Message-ID: <17231.1216671373@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200807/215
X-Sequence-Number: 6909

Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM> writes:
> Thanks for applying patch. I think that hash index "upgradebility" is
> currently broken or it will be with new hash index improvement. But if
> I think about it it does not make sense to break compatibility by this
> patch first.

Right, my point exactly.  Those necessarily-incompatible changes might
or might not ever get applied --- if they are, we can do cosmetic
cleanups afterwards.

			regards, tom lane