From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
Subject: | Re: Optimizer questions |
Date: | 2016-03-08 14:58:58 |
Message-ID: | 20160308145858.GA891717@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> writes:
> > Attached please find improved version of the optimizer patch for LIMIT clause.
> For now, I've set this commitfest entry to Waiting on Author. There's
> still time to consider a rewrite in this 'fest, if you can get it done
> in a week or two.
Yes. Given that Konstantin will have to struggle to get this patch
rebased on top of upper-planner pathification which appeared out of the
blue at the last minute, it seems fair to give some additional time
for the required work.
However, we still have a commitfest schedule to adhere to, and
Konstantin has two other patches in the commitfest:
* Support ALTER INDEX ... WHERE ... clause
* eXtensible Transaction Manager API (v2)
and since we also need his contribution as a patch reviewer, it seems
unfair to just let all his patches move forward --- if we did that, he
would have no time at all to review other's patches, which is a
requirement.
Since we're only one week into the commitfest, I think it's his
prerogative to decide what to do. I think there are two options: he can
either continue with this patch only, and get back from WoA to
Needs-Review in (hopefully) one week; or he can drop this one from the
commitfest right now and concentrate on the two other ones. Either way,
as I already stated, we need his contribution as a reviewer for other
patche, too.
(If I were in his socks, I wouldn't have any hope that the XTM patch
would go in for 9.6 at this point; the most I'd hope is to have lots of
feedback in order to have something to propose for early 9.7. I don't
know the status of the ALTER INDEX one, so I can't comment there.)
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2016-03-08 15:04:08 | Re: Relation extension scalability |
Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2016-03-08 14:43:37 | Re: Exclude pg_largeobject form pg_dump |