Re: damage control mode

On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 2:05 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Given that we have a week still to go in the CF, I feel fairly
> confident of still getting the window frame patch in on time
> (assuming that there are indeed no major problems with it).
> I have not let go of it for that reason, and also because I doubt
> anybody else is qualified to commit it --- AFAIR only Hitoshi-san
> and I were really neck-deep in the original window patch.
>
> However, with the deadline fast approaching, I don't feel that I
> can also promise to handle writeable CTEs, which is another one
> that I'd really like to be the committer for.  Maybe we had better
> make a management decision about which of those two is higher
> priority to get into 9.0.  Also: I haven't been following either
> one terribly closely lately.  If there's reason to think that one is
> more likely to be committable than the other, that ought to get
> factored into the choice of which to go to first; but I'm not
> sure whether that's the case.

As between the two, I get the feeling that there is more interest in
writeable CTEs. But that impression might be wrong, since it's an
unscientific recollection of discussions on -hackers; which are
themselves not representative of anything.

I have not looked at the window functions patch at all, and I haven't
looked at the latest version of writeable CTEs, either. I will try to
spend some time on it in the next couple of days. My feeling about
the last version is that it lacked a lot in the documentation
department, and also in the comments department. Since I don't know
that code very well, that made it hard for me to assess technical
correctness.

...Robert