Re: [HACKERS] CommitFest 2010-07 week one progress report

Hi,

On 07/22/2010 08:51 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> It seems to me that the discussion is Alvaro and I are having with
> Markus is tilted toward having Markus rewrite the imessages interface
> to use an SLRU, in which case neither of them will go in this CF. I'm
> hopeful that Heikki or Tom will comment on this also when they get
> back from their vacations.

Just for the record: I don't currently think a rewrite to use SLRU makes
any sense for imessages.

But to answer Kevin's question: I don't expect to have the prerequisite
patches committed this CF, as I don't think it currently makes any sense
for Postgres to apply them. Nor did I feel there's general consensus
that having we want to have a dynamic memory allocator (for shared memory).

It would be nice to be able to keep track of these kind of patches,
which are available to Postgres and get maintained, but aren't currently
needed or wanted. But do we want to use the CF application for that? How
do you prefer to proceed with these patches?

It's also worth noting that Simon requested more and better
documentation. But I simply can't promise to write anything soon.

Regards

Markus Wanner