From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
Cc: | Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Streaming replication and postmaster signaling |
Date: | 2010-01-07 17:24:10 |
Message-ID: | 27428.1262885050@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> We made the mistake last time to delay the release significantly for a
> single feature. It turned out said feature didn't make it *anyway*.
> Let's not repeat that mistake.
Yeah, we've certainly learned that lesson often enough, or should I say
failed to learn that lesson?
However, HS is already in the tree, and HS without SR is a whole lot
less compelling than HS with SR. So it's going to be pretty
unsatisfying if we can't get SR in there.
I read Robert's original question not so much as a proposal to slip the
schedule to accommodate SR as a question about whether SR could still
meet the current schedule. I think we ought to get that answered before
we start debating schedule changes.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Sabino Mullane | 2010-01-07 17:32:03 | Re: Streaming replication and postmaster signaling |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-01-07 17:23:32 | Re: Streaming replication and postmaster signaling |