> I can understand reluctance to install whatever.0 as a production
> server on its first day of release. But we have enough field experience
> now with 7.0.* to say confidently that it is more stable than 6.5.*,
> and we know for a fact that we have fixed hundreds of bugs in it
> compared to 6.5.*. Frankly, if I had to bet today, I'd bet on 7.1.*
> being less stable than 7.0.*, at least till we shake out all the
> implications of TOAST, WAL, etc.
Is WAL planned for 7.1? What is the story with WAL? I'm a bit concerned
that the current storage manager is going to be thrown in the bit bucket
without any thought for its benefits. There's some stuff I want to do
with it like resurrecting time travel, some database replication stuff
which can make use of the non-destructive storage method etc. There's a
whole lot of interesting stuff that can be done with the current storage
manager.