On 21 March 2016 at 19:55, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:49 AM, Alexander Korotkov
> <a.korot...@postgrespro.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/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Reply via email to