Re: Making clausesel.c Smarter - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Rowley
Subject Re: Making clausesel.c Smarter
Date
Msg-id CAKJS1f8oN+YqkLW-c35+3UajzHbtwo0qPH=1MjN=FfGjodAk9Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [HACKERS] Making clausesel.c Smarter  (David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Making clausesel.c Smarter  (Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@gmail.com>)
Re: Making clausesel.c Smarter  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 4 April 2017 at 08:24, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2017-04-03 20:59:42 +1200, David Rowley wrote:
>> Updated patch attached.
>>
>> Thanks for reviewing it.
>
> Given the time in the release cycle I'm afraid that this it's too late
> to get this into v10.  Does anybody disagree?  If not, it should be
> moved to the next CF.

I strongly disagree. The time in the release cycle is the final
commitfest. This is when patches are commited to the repository. The
exception to this is that no large invasive patches should arrive new
in the final commitfest. This is not one of those.

Tom has already mentioned he'd like to look at this. If you're not
willing, then please just don't look at it, but please also don't
remove other peoples opportunity for doing so.

Please explain your logic for thinking otherwise. Have I somehow
misunderstood what the 1 week extension means?


-- David Rowley                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: PATCH: recursive json_populate_record()
Next
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: [[Parallel] Shared] Hash