| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Stuart Bishop <stuart(at)stuartbishop(dot)net>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Time-based Releases WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again |
| Date: | 2009-09-08 14:14:13 |
| Message-ID: | 25704.1252419253@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> I would argue that it would be an major setback for us if we made
> another release without having Hot Standby or whatever we are calling it
> now. I would much rather slip one month or three than ship without it.
I would agree with you, except that every single time we have done that,
it's led to a scheduling disaster: the release was invariably far later
than anyone expected, and more often than not shipped without the
"critical" feature anyhow. Review the archives.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stuart Bishop | 2009-09-08 14:17:12 | Re: Time-based Releases WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again |
| Previous Message | Kristian Larsson | 2009-09-08 13:58:25 | Adding integers ( > 8 bytes) to an inet |