Re: Request for vote to move forward with recovery.conf overhaul

From: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Request for vote to move forward with recovery.conf overhaul
Date: 2013-03-09 04:20:54
Message-ID: 513AB8A6.1060307@2ndQuadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 3/8/13 10:34 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> This patch is still in the current commit fest. Any objections in
> marking it as returned with feedback and put it in the next commit fest?

There are currently 20 "Needs Review" and 14 "Waiting on Author" things
left in the queue, so it's not quite that there's no time left. There
really isn't very much left to do on this. The rough consensus idea
from before takes a while to describe, but there was not a complicated
implementation in that. The overlap with the still possible to commit
SET PERSISTENT is probably the worst potential issue this is facing now,
but that's not even a real issue yet.

If you're out of time to work on it and want to back out of here having
made good progress, that's fine. I'd be tempted to work on this thing
myself for a bit just to try and finally get it done. If it gets punted
forward, we'll be right back to facing bit rot and remembering what was
going on again, which is what killed the momentum toward committing this
the last time.

--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2013-03-09 04:31:28 Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2013-03-09 04:02:51 Re: Request for vote to move forward with recovery.conf overhaul