Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion

Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Tom Lane wrote:
>> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
>> > On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
>> >> In the first place it's unfair to other developers to make schedule
>> >> slips at the last moment, and especially to *plan* to do so.
>>
>> > Isn't it equally unfair to slip the scheduale that developers that have
>> > been working on some large features (PITR, 2PC immediately coming to mind)
>> > have been working towards based on a deadline? If Win32 that much more
>> > important then those other features?
>>
>> As you well know, I have no use for the Win32 port at all ;-). However,
>> of the "major features" that Bruce just listed, the Win32 port is the
>> only one I consider really likely to appear in 7.5; sure it needs major
>> work yet, but the others are still in the vaporware-till-proven-otherwise
>> category. Certainly they are not solid enough to justify making
>> schedule decisions on the basis of "this will probably be ready by date X".
>>
>> I am willing to adjust the freeze deadline now to make it more probable
>> that at least one of those major features will really make it into 7.5.
>> The realities are that the Win32 port should determine any such schedule
>> decision, because nothing else is close enough to the finish line to
>> justify considering its needs instead.
>>
>> I guess my point is really "do you want to freeze on June 1 if *none*
>> of these features are done?"
>
> Yep, my point too, that we need X big features to schedule beta, and we
> don't have any yet.
>
> I believe PITR actually does work as Simon has tested it, and we have
> the code. Of course, i am discussing how it should be integrated, but I
> do believe it works. And I think Gavin will complete his tablespaces,
> perhaps with our help.
>

We have ARC, the background writer and vacuum delay, and people even ask
me for backports of that (I have one for vacuum delay, but refuse to
make one for the others). How long do you want to delay that being ready
for production? Do you really think people that are suffering from the
fact that checkpoints, vacuum runs and pg_dumps bog down their machines
to the state where simple queries take several seconds care that much
for any Win32 port? Do you think it is a good sign for those who have
been our traditional Unix user base that we delay the important
enhancements that they need because we want to attract a lot of
non-professional users in Windows land? I think that is the wrong signal
to send. However important for marketing the Win32 port is, there are
other things in the pipeline that are important for those users we have
won already long time ago. Let's rather not lose them.

Jan

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #