On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 9:28 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:36 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> There are a lot more than 2 patchsets that are busted at the moment, > >> unfortunately, but I assume you are referring to "snapshot too old" > >> and "Use Foreign Key relationships to infer multi-column join > >> selectivity". > > > > Yeah, those are the ones I'm thinking of. I've not heard serious > > proposals to revert any others, have you? > > Here's a list of what I think is currently broken in 9.6 that we might > conceivably fix by reverting patches: >
Yes, that would be a way forward for 9.6 if we are not able to close blocking open items before beta1. However, I think it would be bad if we miss some of the below listed important features like snapshot_too_old or atomic pin/unpin for 9.6. Can we consider to postpone beta1, so that the patch authors get time to resolve blocking issues? I think there could be a strong argument that it is just a waste of time if the situation doesn't improve much even after delay, but it seems we can rely on people involved in those patch sets to make a progress. With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
