On Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:15 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Amit kapila wrote:
> Rebased version of patch based on latest code.
> Uhm, how can this patch change a caller of PageAddItem() by adding one
> more argument, yet not touch bufpage.c at all? Are you sure this
> compiles?
It compiles, the same is confirmed even with latest Head.
Can you please point me if you feel something is done wrong in the patch.
> The email subject has a WIP tag; is that still the patch status? If so,
> I assume it's okay to mark this Returned with Feedback and expect a
> later version to be posted.
The WIP word is from original mail chain discussion. The current status is as follows:
I have update the patch with all bug fixes and performance results were posted. Noah has also taken the performance
data.
He believes that there is discrepency in performance data, but actually the reason according to me is just the way I
haveposted the data.
Currently there is no clear feedback on which I can work, So I would be very thankfull to you if you can wait for some
conclusionof the discussion.
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.