Re: 9.6 -> 10.0

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Josh berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
> It's important to remember that PR strategy and engineering truth have
> only a passing acquaintance.  While we don't want to promote vaporware,
> we do sometimes soft-pedal our own features to our project's detriment.
> In the current atomosphere of VC-funded hype, we'd do a bit better to
> trumpet our accomplishements early and often.

I see what you mean.

The question must be asked: What feature *would* meet that "major
version bump" standard? If it's not extensive parallelism, then I
don't know what else it could be.

--
Regards,
Peter Geoghegan

--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list (pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy