Re: Open items

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Open items
Date: 2005-06-29 02:47:11
Message-ID: 20050629024711.GU24207@ns.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

* Bruce Momjian (pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Here are our open items. How hard are we going to be about the cutoff
> date? Do we give people the weekend to complete some items?
>
> Changes
> -------
[...]

I'm not sure what else Tom's already working on wrt roles, but I plan to
send in the reasonably small alter-owner permission requirement changes
tommorow. We really should also support SET ROLE. Perhaps if I have
time I'll go through the SQL spec looking at the specific requirements
of 'Basic Role Support' and 'Extended Role Support' and come up with
what we've got, what we're missing, and then we can decide which are
features, which are bugfixes, and what we can claim in the docs.

Thanks,

Stephen

In response to

  • Open items at 2005-06-29 02:02:53 from Bruce Momjian

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2005-06-29 02:53:17 Re: [HACKERS] Avoiding io penalty when updating large objects
Previous Message Mark Dilger 2005-06-29 02:38:43 Avoiding io penalty when updating large objects

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Satoshi Nagayasu 2005-06-29 03:21:03 Re: Open items
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2005-06-29 02:02:53 Open items