| From: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org> |
| Cc: | legrand legrand <legrand_legrand(at)hotmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Planning counters in pg_stat_statements (using pgss_store) |
| Date: | 2019-03-28 08:48:41 |
| Message-ID: | CAOBaU_YsFEKmU31JVjnuxkTgAPYaSKrKmCUh6Ea1EM_10=n3CQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 8:45 AM Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org> wrote:
>
> >> Ok, but keep in mind that this is the last commitfest for pg12, and
> >> there are only 4 days left. Will you have time to take care of it, or
> >> do you need help on it?
> >
> > Oups, sorry, I won't have time nor knowledge to finish in time ;o(
> > Any help is welcome !
>
> No need to rush, this patch has is unlikely to get committed in pg12 even a month earlier. We have a general policy that we don't like complex patches that first show up for the last commitfest of a dev cycle. Current commitfest is last one before feature freeze.
yes, but this patch first showed up years ago:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/16/1373/. Since nothing happened
since, it would be nice to have feedback on whether deeper changes on
the planning functions are required (so for pg13), or if current
approach is ok (and then I hope it'd be acceptable for pg12).
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nagaura, Ryohei | 2019-03-28 08:58:54 | RE: Timeout parameters |
| Previous Message | Michael Banck | 2019-03-28 08:48:12 | Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums |