Re: 9.6 -> 10.0

Le Tue, 22 Mar 2016 22:41:35 +0300,
Oleg Bartunov <obartunov(at)gmail(dot)com> a écrit :

> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 8:52 PM, Peter Geoghegan <
> peter(dot)geoghegan86(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> > > It's important to remember that PR strategy and engineering truth have
> > > only a passing acquaintance. While we don't want to promote vaporware,
> > > we do sometimes soft-pedal our own features to our project's detriment.
> > > In the current atomosphere of VC-funded hype, we'd do a bit better to
> > > trumpet our accomplishements early and often.
> >
> > I see what you mean.
> >
> > The question must be asked: What feature *would* meet that "major
> > version bump" standard? If it's not extensive parallelism, then I
> > don't know what else it could be.
> >
>
> Built-in HA Cluster. Hope to discuss it on PGCon. I thought about release
> 10 in the context of cluster.

I would say "better HA cluster". Good HA is really challenging and rely on many
moving parts or outside technologies from the architecture. I don't know what
you might mean by "Built-in".

Funny, I was joking with a colleague about that today: «Really, the features
that deserves the 10.0 version are GUC-ing the recovery.conf and supports
online-demote»

Regards,
--
Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
Dalibo