On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 2:05 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.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 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers