Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> * Abhijit Menon-Sen (ams(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com) wrote:
>> Also, what should he start with? CF3 as it stands today, or CF4 with all
>> of the pending patches moved from CF3, immense though the result may be?
>> I slightly prefer the latter, so that we're all on the same page when it
>> comes to seeing what needs to be done.
> I'd leave it up to him to decide, but I think the general thought was to
> move it all to one place.
The original intention, per agreement at the last dev meeting,
was that we'd have a "triage" discussion between CF3 and CF4 to try to
figure out which remaining big patches had a realistic chance of getting
committed during CF4. The ones that didn't could then be deferred to
9.4 without first sucking a lot of time away from the ones that could
If we decide to fold CF3 and CF4 together, either we lose that step
(which would make me sad, it seems like a good idea) or we need to
figure another way to work it into the process.
regards, tom lane
In response to
- Re: CF3+4 at 2013-01-16 14:17:54 from Stephen Frost
- Re: CF3+4 at 2013-01-16 19:55:15 from Josh Berkus
- Re: CF3+4 at 2013-01-17 01:34:41 from Simon Riggs
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2013-01-16 19:55:15|
|Subject: Re: CF3+4|
|Previous:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2013-01-16 19:20:52|
|Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] Split out xlog reading into its own module