Thread: Nearing beta?
We are nearing April 15 --- are we nearing a time when we can close 9.3 development and start focusing on the beta? -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> We are nearing April 15 --- are we nearing a time when we can close 9.3
> development and start focusing on the beta?
It's time to start maintaining the list of open items for 9.3,
which would help us figure out if we're ready for beta.
The issue with event triggers causing catalog access during START
TRANSACTION is clearly a "must fix before beta" item. I'm afraid
that bug #8049 is going to require some nontrivial planner changes
(more about that in a bit), which means I'd like to get that into
the beta cycle too. What else are people aware of?
Also, I'd say we need at least draft-quality release notes before
we can start beta, else beta testers won't know what to test.
regards, tom lane
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 11:27:34AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > > We are nearing April 15 --- are we nearing a time when we can close 9.3 > > development and start focusing on the beta? > > It's time to start maintaining the list of open items for 9.3, > which would help us figure out if we're ready for beta. > > The issue with event triggers causing catalog access during START > TRANSACTION is clearly a "must fix before beta" item. I'm afraid > that bug #8049 is going to require some nontrivial planner changes > (more about that in a bit), which means I'd like to get that into > the beta cycle too. What else are people aware of? > > Also, I'd say we need at least draft-quality release notes before > we can start beta, else beta testers won't know what to test. Agreed. Are you saying I should get started on the release notes now? -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > > We are nearing April 15 --- are we nearing a time when we can close 9.3 > > development and start focusing on the beta? > > It's time to start maintaining the list of open items for 9.3, > which would help us figure out if we're ready for beta. > > The issue with event triggers causing catalog access during START > TRANSACTION is clearly a "must fix before beta" item. I'm afraid > that bug #8049 is going to require some nontrivial planner changes > (more about that in a bit), which means I'd like to get that into > the beta cycle too. What else are people aware of? > > Also, I'd say we need at least draft-quality release notes before > we can start beta, else beta testers won't know what to test. Maybe we should release an alpha with current git + draft release notes? -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> The issue with event triggers causing catalog access during START
>> TRANSACTION is clearly a "must fix before beta" item. I'm afraid
>> that bug #8049 is going to require some nontrivial planner changes
>> (more about that in a bit), which means I'd like to get that into
>> the beta cycle too. What else are people aware of?
>>
>> Also, I'd say we need at least draft-quality release notes before
>> we can start beta, else beta testers won't know what to test.
> Maybe we should release an alpha with current git + draft release notes?
I would think that all three of the above-mentioned items could be
resolved in parallel, rather than doing one first. (I assume Bruce
hasn't got anything ready release-note-wise.)
Somebody previously suggested targeting the week of the 22nd for beta
(ie, wrap beta1 on Monday 4/22), and that still seems like it could
work, if there are no bigger problems than these.
regards, tom lane
I wrote:
> It's time to start maintaining the list of open items for 9.3,
> which would help us figure out if we're ready for beta.
I momentarily forgot about materialized views. We definitely need
to decide whether we're going to yank unlogged matviews from 9.3.
regards, tom lane
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 11:42:27AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> The issue with event triggers causing catalog access during START > >> TRANSACTION is clearly a "must fix before beta" item. I'm afraid > >> that bug #8049 is going to require some nontrivial planner changes > >> (more about that in a bit), which means I'd like to get that into > >> the beta cycle too. What else are people aware of? > >> > >> Also, I'd say we need at least draft-quality release notes before > >> we can start beta, else beta testers won't know what to test. > > > Maybe we should release an alpha with current git + draft release notes? > > I would think that all three of the above-mentioned items could be > resolved in parallel, rather than doing one first. (I assume Bruce > hasn't got anything ready release-note-wise.) > > Somebody previously suggested targeting the week of the 22nd for beta > (ie, wrap beta1 on Monday 4/22), and that still seems like it could > work, if there are no bigger problems than these. I can have release notes ready for April 22 --- I will get started. I think all our major features are committed. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: >> We are nearing April 15 --- are we nearing a time when we can close 9.3 >> development and start focusing on the beta? > > It's time to start maintaining the list of open items for 9.3, > which would help us figure out if we're ready for beta. > > The issue with event triggers causing catalog access during START > TRANSACTION is clearly a "must fix before beta" item. I'm afraid > that bug #8049 is going to require some nontrivial planner changes > (more about that in a bit), which means I'd like to get that into > the beta cycle too. What else are people aware of? Page checksum algorithm needs to be decided before beta. If we release an alpha without nailing it down testers need to be warned that checksums are not likely to be upgradable. Regards, Ants Aasma -- Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH Gröhrmühlgasse 26 A-2700 Wiener Neustadt Web: http://www.postgresql-support.de
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> I can have release notes ready for April 22 --- I will get started. I
> think all our major features are committed.
Well, we still have an open commitfest to deal with.
I have taken the liberty of marking as "returned with feedback",
or moving to 2013-Next, all the commitfest entries that don't appear
to me to be committable at this point. There are two remaining
open patches:
sepgsql: db_procedure:execute permission
I do not know the status of this, but unless Robert thinks it's
committable now, it probably needs to go to 2013-Next.
pg_ctl idempotent option
We went around on whether we liked this or not, but it seemed to me
that the discussion came out at the same place Peter had submitted
to start with. I don't know why he's not committed it, but I have
no objection to him doing so, as long as it happens PDQ.
regards, tom lane
On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 12:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > We went around on whether we liked this or not, but it seemed to me > that the discussion came out at the same place Peter had submitted > to start with. I don't know why he's not committed it, but I have > no objection to him doing so, as long as it happens PDQ. Committed and commit fest closed.