Re: Two weeks to feature freeze - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Two weeks to feature freeze
Date
Msg-id 5970.1055992053@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Two weeks to feature freeze  ("Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
Responses Re: Two weeks to feature freeze  (Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>)
Re: Two weeks to feature freeze  ("Ron Mayer" <ron@intervideo.com>)
Re: Two weeks to feature freeze  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
> What about the nested transaction stuff?

With all due respect to Alvaro et al, I can't imagine that that will
make it into 7.4.  (I have no confidence that PITR or Win32 native port
will make it either...)

> Do we have any "killer" features added to 7.4 that we can shout about?

We have a lot of pretty good stuff.  You're not happy that the
performance of IN (subselect) has been fixed?  That btree index bloat is
fixed (at least in large part, it remains to be seen whether the field
performance is all that we need...)?

In my opinion the project is not at a state where whizzy new Features
with a capital F are going to jump out of the woodwork.  We are making
good advances in performance, reliability, SQL spec compliance, and
stuff like that, but fancy-sounding bullet points are hard to come by.

I can tell you that Red Hat's CCM group (the former Ars Digita) is
waiting with bated breath for 7.4, because it fixes a number of problems
(IN-subselect being one) that prevent 7.3 from being a serious
competitor to Oracle for their platform.  7.4 is a killer release for
them, and has been since about February, and they're getting tired of
waiting.  I think a lot of other people are in the same situation,
even though they may not know it ;-)

We can't slip this puppy any more --- it's time to wrap her up and
push her out.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: src/bin/scripts seems a bit of a misnomer now
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: allowed user/db variables