Re: Re: pg9.6 segfault using simple query (related to use fk for join estimates)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Julien Rouhaud <julien(dot)rouhaud(at)dalibo(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stefan Huehner <stefan(at)huehner(dot)org>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Re: pg9.6 segfault using simple query (related to use fk for join estimates)
Date: 2016-06-07 14:20:44
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 10:32:24AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
>> IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUIRED. This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is long past due
>> for your status update. Please reacquaint yourself with the policy on open
>> item ownership[1] and then reply immediately. If I do not hear from you by
>> 2016-06-04 15:00 UTC, I will transfer this item to release management team
>> ownership without further notice.
>> [1]

> This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item now needs a permanent owner. I want PostgreSQL
> to have this planner functionality, but I cannot both give it the attention it
> needs and meet commitments predating this open item. Would any other
> committer like to take ownership? If this role interests you, please read
> this thread and the policy linked above, then send an initial status update
> bearing a date for your subsequent status update. If the item does not have a
> permanent owner by 2016-06-07 22:00 UTC, I will resolve the item by reverting
> commits 68d704e and 137805f.

The state of play here seems to be that Tomas is willing to have a go at
rewriting the patch per my suggestions, but Simon has not shown any
indications of responding in a timely fashion; and time is now of the

I am willing to take ownership of this item; but if I do, I will start
by reverting the aforementioned commits and their followups. I do not
think that very much of what's there now will survive without significant
changes, and to my taste it will be easier to review a rewritten patch
de novo. If Tomas is able to produce a rewritten patch within a week
(by 6/14), I will undertake to review it with an eye to committing by
the end of next week. If we are unable to produce something satisfactory
before beta2, the feature needs to be postponed into the next devel cycle.

regards, tom lane

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-06-07 14:30:18 Re: installcheck failing on psql_crosstab
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2016-06-07 14:19:59 Re: Reviewing freeze map code