Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)

On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 11:44:46PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> writes:
> > I think that those are objectively very large reductions in a cost
> > that figures prominently in most workloads. Based solely on those
> > facts, but also on the fairly low complexity of the patch, it may be
> > worth considering committing this before 9.4 goes into feature freeze,
>
> Personally, I have paid no attention to this thread and have no intention
> of doing so before feature freeze. There are three dozen patches at
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/commitfest_view?id=21
> that have moral priority for consideration for 9.4. Not all of them are
> going to get in, certainly, and I'm already feeling a lot of guilt about
> the small amount of time I've been able to devote to reviewing/committing
> patches this cycle. Spending time now on patches that didn't even exist
> at the submission deadline feels quite unfair to me.
>
> Perhaps I shouldn't lay my own guilt trip on other committers --- but
> I think it would be a bad precedent to not deal with the existing patch
> queue first.

+1

--
Noah Misch
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com