| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Mithun Cy <mithun(dot)cy(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort |
| Date: | 2017-04-04 02:18:21 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaU8+iPUqHV4hOmA-zrvW_N8KNUWTQ_GQVR9s622GCeCg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 5:09 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> To me this hasn't gotten even remotely enough performance evaluation.
> And I don't think it's fair to characterize it as pending since 2013,
> given it was essentially "waiting on author" for most of that.
This is undeniably a patch which has been kicking around for a lot of
time without getting a lot of attention, and if it just keeps getting
punted down the road, it's never going to become committable.
Alexander's questions upthread about what decisions the committer who
took an interest (Heikki) would prefer never really got an answer, for
example. I don't deny that there may be some work left to do here,
but I think blaming the author for a week's delay when this has been
ignored so often for so long is unfair.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tsunakawa, Takayuki | 2017-04-04 02:19:42 | Re: wait event documentation |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-04-04 02:13:18 | Re: Parallel Append implementation |