On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> I think this whole discussion is starting with the wrong premise. This
>> is not a bug fix; therefore, it's 9.1 material.
>
> Failing to store stats isn't a bug?
Well, it kind of sounds more like you're removing a known limitation
than fixing a bug. It's not as if the behavior fails to match the
comment. I'm pretty hesitant to see us making any changes to 9.0 that
aren't necessary to fix existing bugs or new regressions. What I want
to do with 9.0 is get it stable and ship it. I'm not really terribly
concerned about the possibility of an ABI break even at this late
date, but I *am* concerned about the possibility either of (1)
unforeseen consequences necessitating further patching or (2) getting
distracted from the business of getting the release out the door.
We've been in feature freeze for more than five months, so I think
it's certainly time try to reduce to an absolute minimum the number of
changes that "need" to be made before release.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
