| From: | Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: commit fests (was Re: primary key error message) |
| Date: | 2010-01-23 15:00:34 |
| Message-ID: | 8484B466E886A35ACCF679DB@[172.26.14.62] |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
--On 22. Januar 2010 15:40:58 +0200 Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
wrote:
> Beta is still the definite cutoff; and the closer we get to
> beta, the smaller the acceptable changes become. I think that formula
> basically applies throughout the entire cycle.
For someone like me it's hard to guess, what "small" means in that context.
For example, i delayed my work on improving the representation of NOT NULL
constraints in favor of the pg_table_size() patch (my time was too limited
to work on both), since i always thought submitting beyond CF start would
be a non-starter for such a thing.
--
Thanks
Bernd
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-01-23 15:28:12 | Re: commit fests (was Re: primary key error message) |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-01-23 14:48:03 | Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460) |