Re: Recovery Test Framework

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Recovery Test Framework
Date: 2009-01-12 14:55:14
Message-ID: 29814.1231772114@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 09:04 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I wasn't trying to start
>> a discussion about general project policies, but about the specific
>> status of this particular group of patches.

> Which ones exactly?

Well, one of the things that makes me uncomfortable is that it's not
even clear exactly which set of patches is currently proposed for
inclusion. We've seen a whole lot of URLs fly back and forth, many
of them pointing at pages that aren't there a few days later.
I've been too busy with non-replication-related patches to pay really
close attention, but I certainly don't get the impression that there's
a stable set of patches waiting to be applied. (And for the record,
there is nothing I like even a little bit about the practice of posting
a URL instead of an actual patch.)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2009-01-12 15:07:34 Re: SET TRANSACTION and SQL Standard
Previous Message Bernd Helmle 2009-01-12 14:49:36 Re: WIP: Automatic view update rules