Thread: Re: [HACKERS] Variable block size...

> > > Looks like this variable size stuff will be the first new feature
> > > for 6.4 then, eh? :)
> >
> >         What is the chance of having this ready by Friday?  Still would
> > give us 3weeks of debugging...
>
> Well, it's OK to leave _one_ feature for v6.4. Bruce is probably tired of typing
> the feature list :)
>
> Also, we still have a few loose ends for v6.3. But, I'll bet Darren's stuff can
> go in and not affect anything if we run using the current block size.

Great chance of having it by Friday if not sooner.  I'll get on it tonite.

Wasn't sure where the line in the sand was for "adding features" vs "fixing bugs."

Thanks,

Darren

On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, Darren King wrote:

> > > > Looks like this variable size stuff will be the first new feature
> > > > for 6.4 then, eh? :)
> > >
> > >         What is the chance of having this ready by Friday?  Still would
> > > give us 3weeks of debugging...
> >
> > Well, it's OK to leave _one_ feature for v6.4. Bruce is probably tired of typing
> > the feature list :)
> >
> > Also, we still have a few loose ends for v6.3. But, I'll bet Darren's stuff can
> > go in and not affect anything if we run using the current block size.
>
> Great chance of having it by Friday if not sooner.  I'll get on it tonite.
>
> Wasn't sure where the line in the sand was for "adding features" vs
> "fixing bugs."

    The only *fixed* date is march 1st...certain developers have a
little leeway as far as the beta release is concerned...leeway tending to
depend on how quickly bugs they generate get fixed...anyway, fixed sized
block sizes are a bug, aren't they? *grin*

>
> > > > Looks like this variable size stuff will be the first new feature
> > > > for 6.4 then, eh? :)
> > >
> > >         What is the chance of having this ready by Friday?  Still would
> > > give us 3weeks of debugging...
> >
> > Well, it's OK to leave _one_ feature for v6.4. Bruce is probably tired of typing
> > the feature list :)
> >
> > Also, we still have a few loose ends for v6.3. But, I'll bet Darren's stuff can
> > go in and not affect anything if we run using the current block size.
>
> Great chance of having it by Friday if not sooner.  I'll get on it tonite.
>
> Wasn't sure where the line in the sand was for "adding features" vs "fixing bugs."

I think Marc is getting softer on this issue.  [Ducks head]

--
Bruce Momjian
maillist@candle.pha.pa.us

On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> >
> > > > > Looks like this variable size stuff will be the first new feature
> > > > > for 6.4 then, eh? :)
> > > >
> > > >         What is the chance of having this ready by Friday?  Still would
> > > > give us 3weeks of debugging...
> > >
> > > Well, it's OK to leave _one_ feature for v6.4. Bruce is probably
> > > tired of typing the feature list :)
> > >
> > > Also, we still have a few loose ends for v6.3. But, I'll bet Darren's stuff can
> > > go in and not affect anything if we run using the current block size.

> >
> > Great chance of having it by Friday if not sooner.  I'll get on it tonite.
> >
> > Wasn't sure where the line in the sand was for "adding features" vs "fixing bugs."
>
> I think Marc is getting softer on this issue.  [Ducks head]

    Moi?  Never...some ppl have shown over time a...dedication towards
fixing any bugs they introduce in a *very* timely manner *grin*  A little
leeway, as appropriate, tends to reap large rewards for all
parties...specially if we can help improve disk space usage by providing
the ability to tailor disk block size used :)


Marc G. Fournier
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org