Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)

On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 11:44:46PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> writes:
>> > I think that those are objectively very large reductions in a cost
>> > that figures prominently in most workloads. Based solely on those
>> > facts, but also on the fairly low complexity of the patch, it may be
>> > worth considering committing this before 9.4 goes into feature freeze,
>>
>> Personally, I have paid no attention to this thread and have no intention
>> of doing so before feature freeze. There are three dozen patches at
>> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/commitfest_view?id=21
>> that have moral priority for consideration for 9.4. Not all of them are
>> going to get in, certainly, and I'm already feeling a lot of guilt about
>> the small amount of time I've been able to devote to reviewing/committing
>> patches this cycle. Spending time now on patches that didn't even exist
>> at the submission deadline feels quite unfair to me.
>>
>> Perhaps I shouldn't lay my own guilt trip on other committers --- but
>> I think it would be a bad precedent to not deal with the existing patch
>> queue first.
>
> +1

+1

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company