Thread: BETA
I think it might be time to think about shipping a beta release. I guess this is a -core decision, but I can't argue for it there, so I'll argue for it here. It seems like we're about ready, so maybe we could plan for a beta, say, a week from now? Here's a quick run-down of the remaining open items at http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.0_Open_Items ... - Fix to_char('L') (localization) on Win32 when the operating system character encoding does not match the database encoding Seems like we're close to a fix on this, but even if not, I don't see why this should be considered a blocker for beta. - Thread safety and libxml2 A proposed patch is available, but nobody seems to care enough to bother testing it, so I can't get excited about postponing beta for it. - fix flight of fancy in InitPostgres Tom is looking at this, so it will be fixed in 17 microseconds. clarify HS error message when WAL settings are no good - This is just a case of adjusting an error message, no reason we can't wrap it up in the next couple of days. Improve behavior of SUSET GUC variables added by loadable modules? - Tom's looking at this, too. The replication connections consume superuser_reserved_connections slots. - I will fix this. Tuning of KnownAssignedXids module - This is important, but Simon has a patch he thinks will fix it. Could use some more testing, but again, no reason this can't get done in the next week. There are also two "documentation" issues listed; but I believe these can wait for 9.0 final. Greg Smith tells me he's still cranking away at figuring out what advice we can best offer. /me pushes luck And how about a set of back-branch releases while we're at it? /me also volunteers to help, assuming anyone thinks that any of the above is a good idea ...Robert
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > /me pushes luck > > And how about a set of back-branch releases while we're at it? Yes, please don't push your luck :-p -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 18:23 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > > > /me pushes luck > > > > And how about a set of back-branch releases while we're at it? > > Yes, please don't push your luck :-p /me gives Dave an "Easy" button. > > > > -- > Dave Page > EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com > The Enterprise Postgres Company > -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010, Robert Haas wrote: > /me pushes luck > > And how about a set of back-branch releases while we're at it? We tend to try and avoid overlapping a "release" with a "beta" to avoid confusion ... but didn't we just do a fresh back branch release anyway? ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A. scrappy@hub.org http://www.hub.org Yahoo:yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ:7615664 MSN:scrappy@hub.org
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 6:37 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: > On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 18:23 +0100, Dave Page wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > /me pushes luck >> > >> > And how about a set of back-branch releases while we're at it? >> >> Yes, please don't push your luck :-p > > /me gives Dave an "Easy" button. /me offers to fix JD's parser to handle smileys. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
> - Fix to_char('L') (localization) on Win32 when the operating system
> character encoding does not match the database encoding
> Seems like we're close to a fix on this, but even if not, I don't see
> why this should be considered a blocker for beta.
If this isn't an issue specific to 9.0, I agree.
> - Thread safety and libxml2
> A proposed patch is available, but nobody seems to care enough to
> bother testing it, so I can't get excited about postponing beta for
> it.
More importantly, this isn't a new issue.
> Improve behavior of SUSET GUC variables added by loadable modules?
> - Tom's looking at this, too.
Is this an issue specific to 9.0?
-- -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: >> Improve behavior of SUSET GUC variables added by loadable modules? >> - Tom's looking at this, too. > > Is this an issue specific to 9.0? http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-04/msg00865.php ...Robert
On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 18:23 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > > > /me pushes luck > > > > And how about a set of back-branch releases while we're at it? > > Yes, please don't push your luck :-p /me gives Dave an "Easy" button. > > > > -- > Dave Page > EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com > The Enterprise Postgres Company > -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org> wrote: > On Tue, 20 Apr 2010, Robert Haas wrote: > >> /me pushes luck >> >> And how about a set of back-branch releases while we're at it? > > We tend to try and avoid overlapping a "release" with a "beta" to avoid > confusion ... but didn't we just do a fresh back branch release anyway? Eh, so we did. How did I miss that? 8.4.3 was released 2010-03-05. I was thinking 8.4.2 was still current. Well, never mind that then. How about a beta next week? ...Robert
On Wed, 21 Apr 2010, Robert Haas wrote: > Well, never mind that then. How about a beta next week? I'm good for that ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A. scrappy@hub.org http://www.hub.org Yahoo:yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ:7615664 MSN:scrappy@hub.org
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org> wrote: > On Wed, 21 Apr 2010, Robert Haas wrote: >> Well, never mind that then. How about a beta next week? > > I'm good for that ... Anyone else want to weigh in for or against this? ...Robert
On Thu, 22 Apr 2010, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org> wrote: >> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010, Robert Haas wrote: >>> Well, never mind that then. How about a beta next week? >> >> I'm good for that ... > > Anyone else want to weigh in for or against this? We're discussing scheduling on -core right now, triggered by your email, and will put out a notice shortly ... although we did just do a back branch release, we have a second one that has to be done, so we're trying to balance schedules around doing both, but not simultaneously ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A. scrappy@hub.org http://www.hub.org Yahoo:yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ:7615664 MSN:scrappy@hub.org
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org> wrote: > We're discussing scheduling on -core right now, triggered by your email, and > will put out a notice shortly ... although we did just do a back branch > release, we have a second one that has to be done, so we're trying to > balance schedules around doing both, but not simultaneously ... OK, thanks! ...Robert
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> I think it might be time to think about shipping a beta release. I
> guess this is a -core decision, but I can't argue for it there, so
> I'll argue for it here. It seems like we're about ready, so maybe we
> could plan for a beta, say, a week from now?
A bit of discussion among -core and -packagers has not turned up any
objections, so we'll plan to wrap beta1 on Thursday 29th for public
announcement Monday 5/3.
regards, tom lane