Обсуждение: scheduling
Do we have a projected data for the next 9.0 wrap, and will it be beta5 or rc1? How much should we worry about the remaining open items? http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.0_Open_Items I am inclined to say that all three of the items currently on the list need to be addressed in some way before we move forward... or at least the last two. * ExplainOnePlan handles snapshots differently than ProcessQuery * Backup procedure is wrong? * Walreceiver crashes in AIX -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 20:13, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > Do we have a projected data for the next 9.0 wrap, and will it be > beta5 or rc1? How much should we worry about the remaining open > items? If we are taking a vote, I +1 for rc1 :). > http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.0_Open_Items > > I am inclined to say that all three of the items currently on the list > need to be addressed in some way before we move forward... or at least > the last two. > > * ExplainOnePlan handles snapshots differently than ProcessQuery Isn't this one not specific to 9.0? If so I don't think it should be a "blocker". > * Backup procedure is wrong? This *sounds* like a documentation bug, seems like something we can fix while in -rc to me.
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > Do we have a projected data for the next 9.0 wrap, and will it be > beta5 or rc1? No, and don't know ;-). It won't be till after the 15th because assorted people are on vacation. Perhaps a reasonable plan is to wrap on the 19th (week from Thursday), and to decide mid next week whether we feel good about calling it rc1. > How much should we worry about the remaining open items? > http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.0_Open_Items > I am inclined to say that all three of the items currently on the list > need to be addressed in some way before we move forward... or at least > the last two. > * ExplainOnePlan handles snapshots differently than ProcessQuery > * Backup procedure is wrong? > * Walreceiver crashes in AIX I don't think that now is an appropriate time to be messing with the first item. It is not a 9.0 regression --- the behavior has been that way for years --- and it is not closely related to any changes we made in 9.0. If we'd discovered the issue after 9.0.0 release there would have been absolutely no suggestion of back-patching a change. Also, it didn't seem to me that we had consensus on what to do about it, so the thought of a hasty change scares me. We do need to resolve the others. regards, tom lane