Re: Open items list for 8.1

From: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Open items list for 8.1
Date: 2005-09-28 07:33:10
Message-ID: E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E4CC2F34@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Marc
> G. Fournier
> Sent: 28 September 2005 00:50
> To: Tom Lane
> Cc: Bruce Momjian; PostgreSQL-development; Neil Conway
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Open items list for 8.1
>
>
> IMHO, changes like this *should not* have been allowed during
> beta, period
> ... even during feature freeze, it would have been questionable :(

Agreed. It's not like they weren't discussed to death prior to then as
well.

Whilst I'm not so wed to the changes to the others, pg_cancel_backend()
should certainly not be changed on whim - I know for a fact there are
people for whom this will cause problems.

Regards, Dave

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ilia Kantor 2005-09-28 08:12:53 Re: effective SELECT from child tables
Previous Message Qingqing Zhou 2005-09-28 06:10:01 Re: Database file compatability