>> No, of course it doesn't. It appears that you didn't look at the repo or read my previous mail before you wrote this. > > FFS, I *ran* some of the tests and reported on results. With you in CC. Just checked back. So you did. I'm sorry, I made the mistake I accused you of. But... why then did you say I hadn't provided him with individual functions, when you've seen the repo yourself? I don't understand. You knew they're there. > What I mean is that I don't just run random code from some random github > repository. Sure, but surely that's not an issue when the SQL functions are also seperately provided and clearly labelled in the repo? Do you feel there is a difference about the trustworthiness of isolated files containing an SQL function presented in a github repo, and SQL functions presented in an email? I am not sure I can agree with that idea, I think they are both just SQL functions. The difference is that one also offers you a bit more if you want to check/try it. > I do not wish to antagonise you either, so please go and look at the >> repo before you write the next reply. > > Over and out. Seems there has been a misunderstanding here and I feel I'm still missing something in what you're saying. Sorry Andres. Let's just forget this. I don't think we disagree especially on this and I am not looking to make an enemy here. Also, thanks for running the benchmarks to get some numbers. Graeme. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
