Re: Two-phase commit for 8.1 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Kenneth Marshall
Subject Re: Two-phase commit for 8.1
Date
Msg-id 20050120132934.GC14816@it.is.rice.edu
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Two-phase commit for 8.1  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 07:42:03PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes:
> > If the patch is ready to be committed early in the cycle, I'd say most 
> > definitely ... just depends on how late in the cycle its ready ...
> 
> My recollection is that it's quite far from being complete.  I had hoped
> to spend some time during the 8.1 cycle helping Heikki finish it up,
> but if we stick to the 2-month-dev-cycle idea I'm afraid there's no way
> it'll be done in time.  I thought that "some time" would probably amount
> to a solid man-month or so, and there's no way I can spend half my time
> on just one feature for this cycle.
> 
> If Heikki wants this in for 8.1, the right thing to do is vote against
> the short-dev-cycle idea.  But we need a plausible answer about what to
> do about ARC to make that credible...
> 

I think the idea of making a buffer management algorithm API and then
preparing a simple LRU algorithm to have ready to plug in if the ARC
patent is granted would be doable in a short development cycle. Then
we can take advantage of as well as test other algorithms more easily.

Ken


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Euler Taveira de Oliveira
Date:
Subject: Re: Translations at pgfoundry (was Re: [PATCHES] Latest Turkish translation updates)
Next
From: Reinoud van Leeuwen
Date:
Subject: Re: US Patents vs Non-US software ...