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

Re: 7.1 items

From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 7.1 items
Date: 2000-04-06 16:19:09
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 6 Apr 2000, Tom Lane wrote:

> Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz> writes:
> >>>> WAL/write ahead log
> >>>> TOAST/long tuples
> >>>> outer joins
> >>>> query tree redesign
> >>>> function manager redesign
> >>>> 
> >>>> What year to we want to release 7.1?  :-)
> >  If all will right (and major developers will agree) I plan PREPARE/EXECUTE
> > commands and changes in SPI background for plan saving (query cache).
> Given that there is going to be a querytree redesign for 7.1, I'd
> suggest holding off on prepared plans until 7.2.  Otherwise it's
> going to be a mess.
> The good thing about the above list is that we have four essentially
> independent major projects.  (I think outer joins are a portion of the
> querytree work, not a separate item.)  So work on them can proceed in
> parallel.  And, if it gets to be September-ish and only two or three
> are done, we can make a 7.1 release and still feel pretty good about
> having some nice stuff.
> This does bring up a suggestion that Jan has made in the past.  Perhaps
> it would be a good idea if we create a separate CVS branch for each of
> these major projects, so that people could work on that project
> independently of the others.  When a project is done, we merge it back
> into the main branch.  Then it's no problem if one of the projects is
> broken temporarily, or not ready to go when we want to release 7.1.
> OTOH, managing separate CVS branches might be a real pain in the neck,
> especially for developers who need to deal with more than one project.
> I've never done it so I don't have a feeling for what it would take.
> But the Mozilla people do this sort of thing all the time, so it can't
> be that bad.

I've only ever seen it done for the kernel of FreeBSD, and very very
rarely at that ... 

Marc G. Fournier                   ICQ#7615664               IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ 
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org           secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org 

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2000-04-06 16:20:33
Subject: Re: Book and TEMP vs. TEMPORARY
Previous:From: Karel ZakDate: 2000-04-06 16:17:49
Subject: Re: pg_dumplo, thanks :) (fwd)

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