On Mar 26, 2012, at 5:36 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> 2. I'm not sure which patches Tom is planning to look at or in what
>> order, so I've been avoiding the ones he seems to be taking an
>> interest in.
>
> Well, I think I'm definitely on the hook for the pg_stat_statements,
> pgsql_fdw, foreign table stats, and caching-stable-subexpressions
> patches, and I should look at the libpq alternate row returning
> mechanism because I suspect I was the last one to mess with that libpq
> code in any detail. I don't claim any special insight into the other
> stuff on the list. In particular I've not been paying much attention
> to command triggers.
How long will that all take?
I guess I'll work on command triggers, pg_archivecleanup, and buffer I/O timings next.
>
>> Personally, I am about at the point where I'd like to punt everything
>> and move on. As nice as it would be to squeeze a few more things into
>> 9.2, there WILL be a 9.3. If a few less people had submitted
>> half-baked code at the last minute and a few more people had helped
>> with review, we'd be done by now.
>
> The main reason I proposed setting a schedule a few weeks ago was that
> I was afraid the commitfest would otherwise end precisely in a "we're
> tired out, we're punting everything to 9.3" moment. Without some
> definite goal to work towards, it'll just keep stretching out until
> we've had enough. I'd prefer it end in a more orderly fashion than
> that. The end result will be the same, in the sense that some of the
> stuff that's still-not-ready-for-committer is going to get punted,
> but people might have a less bad taste in their mouths about why.
Fine. What do you propose, specifically?
...Robert
