| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: No longer possible to query catalogs for index capabilities? |
| Date: | 2016-08-08 18:29:54 |
| Message-ID: | 11064.1470680994@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> Having said all that, it is unfortunate that 9.6 is going to go out
> without any good solution to this need. But as Robert already pointed
> out, trying to fix it now would force delaying 9.6rc1 by several weeks
> (and that's assuming that it doesn't take very long to get consensus
> on a solution). There's not, AFAICT, desire on the part of the release
> team to do that. We'd like to ship 9.6 on time for a change.
After some back-and-forth among the release team, there's been a decision
to change this position: today's wrap will be 9.6beta4, and we'll try to
get something done about the AM property access issue before issuing rc1.
We only have a week or two to get this done without starting to impact
v10 development as well as hurting our chances of shipping 9.6.0 in
September. So let's start getting down to details.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Claudio Freire | 2016-08-08 18:36:12 | Re: Heap WARM Tuples - Design Draft |
| Previous Message | Shay Rojansky | 2016-08-08 18:25:49 | Re: Slowness of extended protocol |