| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr(at)dalibo(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "Gregory Stark (as CFM)" <stark(dot)cfm(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Commitfest 2023-03 starting tomorrow! |
| Date: | 2023-04-21 13:50:48 |
| Message-ID: | 3334406.1682085048@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr(at)dalibo(dot)com> writes:
> After catching up with this thread, where pending bugs are listed and discussed,
> I wonder if the current patches trying to lower the HashJoin memory explosion[1]
> could be added to the "Older bugs affecting stable branches" list of
> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_16_Open_Items as I think they
> deserve some discussion/triage for v16?
They do not. That patch is clearly nowhere near ready to commit, and
even if it was, I don't think we'd consider it post-feature-freeze.
Any improvement in this space would be a feature, not a bug fix,
despite anyone's attempts to label it a bug fix.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Imseih (AWS), Sami | 2023-04-21 14:28:24 | Correct the documentation for work_mem |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2023-04-21 13:42:57 | base backup vs. concurrent truncation |