Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: 9.2 release schedule

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 9.2 release schedule
Date: 2012-07-24 17:54:49
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 4:10 AM, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 10:29:06AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> > Seems OK, but I think we need to work a little harder on evicting some
>> > things from the list of open items.  I don't think all of the things
>> > listed in the blockers section really are, and I'm not sure what needs
>> > to be done about some of the things that are there.
>> I've got the libpq row processor thing.  That and the CHECK NO INHERIT
>> syntax thing are definitely release-blockers, because we won't be able
>> to change such decisions post-release (well, we could, but the pain to
>> benefit ratio is bad).  I guess the SPGiST vs HS issue is a blocker too.
>> A lot of the rest look like pre-existing bugs to me.
> The only preexisting issues listed under "Blockers for 9.2" are "GiST indexes
> vs fuzzy comparisons used by geometric types" and "Should we fix tuple limit
> handling, or redefine 9.x behavior as correct?".  Also, I'm not sure what
> exactly the "keepalives" item indicates.  Whether every regression deserves to
> block the release is, of course, a separate question.
> I think "WAL files which were restored from the archive are archived again" is
> the thorniest regression, and we don't yet have a patch.

Yep, that's really a problem. Will implement the patch.


Fujii Masao

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andres FreundDate: 2012-07-24 18:05:53
Subject: Re: canceling autovacuum task woes
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2012-07-24 17:48:27
Subject: canceling autovacuum task woes

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group