Re: damage control mode

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: damage control mode
Date: 2010-01-08 03:20:37
Message-ID: 25250.1262920837@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> OK, we have a proposal on the table to bump some patches from this
> CommitFest to free up more committer resources, particularly Tom, to
> work on Hot Standby and Streaming Replication and attempt to
> accelerate the process of getting 8.5 out the door. This proposal
> needs input from the community. The affected patches are:

> - Listen/Notify Rewrite.
> - Writeable CTEs.
> - more frame options for window functions
> - knngist
> - rbtree

Looking at this list again, it strikes me that the listen/notify rewrite
might need to go in so that we have a sane framework for listen/notify
with HS. Treating pg_listener as a replicatable table isn't sane at
all, whereas with a message-driven notify mechanism we have at least got
the possibility of shipping the messages to the standby (via WAL) and
having listeners there. I don't want to say we'd actually implement
that in 8.5, but shipping pg_listener tuple updates is just completely
nuts.

The other four things have no apparent connection to HS/SR so I think
they could be punted without creating technical issues. Whether this
is really necessary from a schedule viewpoint is not clear yet.

My thought about it would be to put these four on the back burner;
not necessarily bounce them right away, but not put any effort into
them until we have dealt with the other stuff in the January CF.
At that point we should have a feel for where we are schedule-wise,
and in particular we'll know whether SR is in or not ;-)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-01-08 03:26:14 Re: Setting oom_adj on linux?
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-01-08 03:17:51 Re: Stats for inheritance trees