Re: Streaming replication and postmaster signaling

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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