On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> It may all work pretty easily, but I'm still caffeine-deprived so I'm
> not sure ...
I think that it's not a good idea to devote too much energy to this
problem right now, anyway. We have crammed a gigantic pile of code
into the source tree in the last month, and there are bound to be bugs
even in what we already have. We need to get that code out into the
field in the form of alpha and beta releases and start getting it
tested; and even apart from bugs, we need to get some field experience
with it, so that we learn which things work well enough in practice
and which things are really problems. Then we can come back to the
table and engineer better solutions for 9.2.
It is also important that we get to the point of being able to start
accepting 9.2 patches on other topics as quickly as possible. Unless
we do something radically different than what we have done in previous
releases, we are now about to enter a ~4 month period during which
there will be no CommitFests and very little 9.2 work underway, at
least publicly. Even with the improvements we have made in getting
CommitFests started and finished on time (the present case being,
fortunately, an exception, and yeah I know it could have been a lot
worse, but it could also have been better), the long quiet period that
is required to get a release out the door is still problematic for
many of our developers.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
