On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 3:05 AM, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 12:04:59PM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On 6/6/16 9:45 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> >There appears to be a problem with how client encoding is handled in the
>> >communication from parallel workers.
>>
>> I have added this to the open items for now.
>
> [Action required within 72 hours. This is a generic notification.]
>
> The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item. Robert,
> since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open
> item. If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong as a
> 9.6 open item, please let us know. Otherwise, please observe the policy on
> open item ownership[1] and send a status update within 72 hours of this
> message. Include a date for your subsequent status update. Testers may
> discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them all fixed
> well in advance of shipping 9.6rc1. Consequently, I will appreciate your
> efforts toward speedy resolution. Thanks.
There is no realistic way that I am going to have this fixed before
beta2. There are currently 10 open items listed on the open items
page, of which 8 relate to my commits and 5 to parallel query in
particular. I am not going to get 8 issues fixed in the next 4 days,
or even the next 6 days if you assume I can work through the weekend
on this (and that it would be desirable that I be slinging fixes into
the tree just before the wrap, which seems doubtful). Furthermore, of
those issues, I judge this to be least important (except for the
documentation update, but that's pending further from Peter Geoghegan
about exactly what he thinks needs to be changed).
Therefore, my plan is to revisit this in two weeks once beta2 is out
the door, unless someone else would like to volunteer to fix it
sooner.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
