Re: Two weeks to feature freeze

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Tom said that our low-hanging fruit is gone and only hard items are
> > left. This is certainly true. What is hard to accept is that those big
> > items take _weeks_ of focused development, and we just don't have enough
> > full-time developers who can spend that amount of time to do them. The
> > sad truth is that there is alway something _else_ to do, rather than
> > block out weeks to code a complex feature. And these are usually
> > features that can't be done incrementally, but require a huge input of
> > time before there is any payback.
>
> I spent weeks doing hash aggregates, weeks doing IN-subselect
> optimization, and am in the middle of many weeks on FE/BE protocol
> improvement. I am sorry that you don't see these as killer features
> ... but they are all things that we desperately needed to do.
>

Yes, I know they are _very_ needed, but they don't increase
functionality the way Win32 or PITR would do.

Please don't feel I am minimizing these features. If I had to choose, I
would choose those features over Win32 or PITR. It is just that I
wanted all of them. :-(

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073