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

Re: Open 7.3 items

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>,PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Open 7.3 items
Date: 2002-07-31 04:29:18
Message-ID: 24712.1028089758@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... My own opinion is
>> that there is nothing broken there; certainly nothing so broken that
>> we need to force a change under schedule pressure.

> I don't feel we are under pressure.  We have time to discuss and address
> it.

Well, it's all a matter of how you look at it.  Isn't the point of your
post that began this thread to start giving people a sense of time
pressure?

I agree that if we could quickly come to a resolution about how this
ought to work, there's plenty of time to go off and implement it.  But
(1) we failed to come to a consensus before, so I'm not optimistic
than one will suddenly emerge now; (2) we've got a ton of other issues
that we *need* to deal with before beta.  This one does not strike me
as a must-fix, and so I'm loathe to spend much development time on it
when there are so many open issues.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Yuva ChandoluDate: 2002-07-31 04:29:48
Subject: Re: Outer join differences
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2002-07-31 04:22:24
Subject: Re: Open 7.3 items

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