Re: Not 7.5, but 8.0 ?

Maybe the criteria for 8.0 should be in place upgrades... that would be
a major shift in the landscape of PostgreSQL...

Robert Treat

On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 21:20, Christopher Browne wrote:
> Oops! josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com (Josh Berkus) was seen spray-painting on a wall:
> > Given all that, don't people think it's time to jump to 8.0? Seems
> > like even 7.4 is hardly recognizable as the same database as 7.0.
>
> If wishes were fishes... Shouldn't we see what interesting features
> actually _do_ make it in?
>
> If Win32 support does get ready, and we get recursive queries (I'll
> point out different TODO items :-)) and Slony-1, PITR, and cache
> improvements make it in, then perhaps it's time to call it 8.0. A
> "cvs update -Pd" doesn't get me that yet, so it seems early.
>
> I'd _almost_ buy the story that 7.4 should have been called 8.0,
> although that _didn't_ happen because it 'just missed' PITR and Win32.
>
> The amusing approach would be to jump straight to 8.1 :-).
> --
> wm(X,Y):-write(X),write('@'),write(Y). wm('cbbrowne','acm.org').
> http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/postgresql.html
> ..you could spend *all day* customizing the title bar. Believe me. I
> speak from experience." -- Matt Welsh
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
> joining column's datatypes do not match

--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL