From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Warning about the 8.4 release |
Date: | 2009-01-06 17:57:36 |
Message-ID: | 200901061757.n06Hva404433@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On Tuesday 06 January 2009 18:49:00 Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > If people have further updates please, please send them (with subject
> > headings please).
>
> Most of the entries are quite frankly junk, either already committed, already
> rejected, patches not under consideration, irrelevant discussions, or
> completely silly, e.g.,
>
> 261. Warning about the 8.4 release
That was the same reaction Tom had. Again, many might be junk, but is
it 100% junk. What about:
8.4 - psql output for \l
Overriding Kerberos parameters
HAVE_FSEEKO for WIN32
stat() vs cygwin
Memory mess introduced by recent funcapi.c patch
The suppress_redundant_updates_trigger() works incorrectly
So what's an "empty" array anyway?
I just picked those at random. And again, though they are not required
for the release, they appeared during 8.4 development and should be
fixed now, if possible.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-01-06 18:00:29 | SQL/MED dummy vs postgresql wrapper |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-01-06 17:50:51 | Re: dblink vs SQL/MED - security and implementation details |