From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Declarative partitioning |
Date: | 2016-03-21 20:00:55 |
Message-ID: | CANP8+jJ=TvynXeDQUF43wqyV-666YqBAGkMviMXRHY0Xi17a5g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 21 March 2016 at 19:55, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:49 AM, Alexander Korotkov
> <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> >> > I'd like to validate that this development plan doesn't overlaps with
> >> > your
> >> > plans. If out plans are not overlapping then let's accept this plan
> of
> >> > work
> >> > for 9.7.
> >>
> >> It looks OK to me. Thanks for sharing it.
> >
> >
> > Great! Let's work together.
>
> So, the last patch on this thread was posted on February 17th, and the
> CF entry was marked Waiting on Author on March 2nd. Even if we had a
> new patch in hand at this point, I don't think there's any real chance
> of being able to get this done for 9.6; there are too many things left
> to do here in terms of figuring out syntax and scope, and of course
> performance testing. Moreover, when this goes in, it's going to open
> up lots of opportunities for follow-up optimizations that we surely do
> not have time to follow up on for 9.6. And, as it is, the patch
> hasn't been updated in over a month and is clearly not in final form
> as it exists today.
>
> Therefore, I have marked this Returned with Feedback. I look forward
> to returning to this topic for 9.7, and I'm willing to step up to the
> plate and review this more aggressively at that time, with an eye
> toward committing it when we've got it in good shape. But I don't
> think there's any way to proceed with it for 9.6.
>
Good decision.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
<http://www.2ndquadrant.com/>
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2016-03-21 20:05:02 | Re: snapshot too old, configured by time |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-03-21 19:55:03 | Re: Declarative partitioning |