Robert Haas <[email protected]> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Josh Berkus <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I think we can give Sync Rep until the 15th, given the pace of work on
>> it. It is a major feature, and a complicated one.
> Sure, but there are other features, major and minor, that we have
> postponed to 9.2. In the normal course of events, sync rep would have
> been marked Returned with Feedback a month ago. I like the feature,
> but I have to say I'm not very pleased that we seem to have fallen
> into a pattern of believing that some major features are somehow
> exempted from the scheduling deadline and others are not.
Yes. What are the rest of us supposed to do for the next two weeks,
twiddle our thumbs?
Personally I've got a couple of days' worth of cleanup tasks before I'd
want to see us cut an alpha anyway, especially if we're going to try
to accept the btree_gist KNNgist patch. Two weeks is too much though.
I'd say that if there's a plausible chance that Sync Rep will be
committable by the end of *this* week (and I mean Friday not Sunday),
I'm willing to wait that long for it. Otherwise, it's 9.2 material.
> Frankly, I think we should be aiming to get a beta out in April, not
> another alpha.
Quite.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
