Re: [HACKERS] RI status report #2

>
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Man, that's a heap of additions.
> >
> > Only the top of the iceberg :-)
>
> Yikes. I was just talking to Thomas Lockhart by phone, and was saying
> that I thought 6.6 would be a small, incremental release after the
> changes in 6.5.*. Obviously, 6.6 is going to be as full-featured as
> earlier releases.

Wasn't it YOU who asked ME to become active again? Your
above thought is a little silly if ya really wanted to
interrupt my sleep mode ;-)

OTOH Vadim is close to WAL and I see activity on
(outer/left/right?) join support too. Maybe there wouldn't be
a v6.6 at all.

WAL is IMHO the only real reason not to choose PostgreSQL for
production. Beeing able to recover (roll forward) from a
backup using transaction log is a required feature for
mission critical data. Thus, having all this (WAL, FOREIGN
KEY etc.) is a greater step forward that that between v6.4
and v6.5.

If all that really materializes in our next release, it's
time to number it v7.0 - no?

Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#========================================= wieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck) #