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

Wild idea: 9.0?

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Wild idea: 9.0?
Date: 2007-04-23 19:24:15
Message-ID: 200704231224.15429.josh@agliodbs.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-hackers
Hackers,

I was thinking about the upcoming release on my 32-hour epic airplane ordeal, 
and realizing that it changes PostgreSQL in a lot of ways.  Between major 
improvements to performance, major changes to the file format, and changes to 
implicit conversions breaking backwards compatibility, our new ability to 
more-or-less stick to deadlines ...

... should this be 9.0 instead of 8.3?  

Seems like it'd be both an annoucement of how far we've come, as well as a 
warning to users that the 8.2-->9.0 upgrade could be painful.  And that some 
of our more radical features in the new version could have some rough edges.

Of course, that does put is closer to 10.0 which is going to break a lot of 
packager's scripts. ;-)

Thoughts?

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2007-04-23 19:26:31
Subject: Hyena down, to be replaced by other Sun systems on Buildfarm
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-04-23 18:51:51
Subject: Re: BUG #3245: PANIC: failed to re-find shared loc k o b j ect

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2007-04-23 19:36:56
Subject: Re: Jav Database Performance
Previous:From: Andreas 'ads' ScherbaumDate: 2007-04-23 09:18:02
Subject: Re: Start-Up of the European Group

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