On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I'd vote for including this in v10.  There doesn't seem to be any
>> downside to this: it's a no brainer to avoid our exploding hash table
>> case when we can see it coming.
> Anybody else want to vote that way?  For myself it's getting a bit late
> in the beta process to be including inessential changes, but I'm willing
> to push it to v10 not just v11 if there's multiple people speaking for
> that.

I'd vote for waiting until v11.  I think it's too late to be doing
things that might change good plans into bad ones or visca versa;
that's a recipe for having to put out 10.1 and 10.2 a little quicker
than I'd like.

Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to