Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: damage control mode

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: damage control mode
Date: 2010-01-12 07:12:50
Message-ID: 162867791001112312l1ac9a21dsd8dd524bedc511ce@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> The consensus view on this thread seems to be that we should have a
> time-based code freeze, but not a time-based release.  No one has
> argued (and I sincerely hope no one will argue) that we should let the
> last CommitFest drag on and on, as we did for 8.4.  However, many
> people are still eager to see us commit more large patches even though
> they know that there are stop-ship issues in CVS HEAD as a result of
> Hot Standby, and despite the fact that committing more large patches
> will likely add more such issues.  So, barring the possibility that we
> somehow pull a collective rabbit out of our hat, we will NOT be ready
> for beta on March 1.  I have not yet given up hope on April 1, but I
> wouldn't bet on it, either.
>

+1

Pavel

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2010-01-12 07:22:06
Subject: Re: Streaming replication status
Previous:From: Andres FreundDate: 2010-01-12 05:40:02
Subject: Re: Hot Standy introduced problem with query cancel behavior

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group