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

Re: [HACKERS] Wild idea: 9.0?

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Wild idea: 9.0?
Date: 2007-04-23 22:17:47
Message-ID: 200704231517.48045.josh@agliodbs.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-hackers
Tom,

> Eyeing the patch queue and wondering how much of it is really going to
> get in, I'm not sure that eight point two and a half wouldn't be a more
> appropriate name.  It's been a short devel cycle and one almost entirely
> focused on performance, not user-visible features.

Ah, in my enthusiasm I was assuming most of it would clear.

>
> > 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.
>
> Why would you think that?

File format changes and the implicit conversion patch.

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2007-04-23 22:17:49
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Wild idea: 9.0?
Previous:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2007-04-23 22:15:24
Subject: Re: BUG #3245: PANIC: failed to re-find shared loc k o b j ect

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2007-04-23 22:17:49
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Wild idea: 9.0?
Previous:From: usleeplessDate: 2007-04-23 22:03:59
Subject: Re: Wild idea: 9.0?

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