"Matthew T. O'Connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well I didn't get out of the office as early as I had hoped, and I have
> stayed up longer than I had planned, but I have a patch that addresses
> many of the issues raised by Tom. Please take a look at let me know if
> I'm heading in the right direction.
You're headed in the right direction, but I'm afraid we're running out
of time. The core committee has chewed this over and agreed that we
can't postpone beta for the amount of time we think it will take to make
this patch committable. So we're going to hold it over for the 8.1
I have to make a personal apology to you for the fact that things worked
out this way. I really should have looked at your patch much earlier
and given you some feedback that might have allowed you to resolve the
issues in time. I did not because (a) I felt that the other patches
I was working on were more important features (a judgment I still stand
by) and (b) I thought your patch was in good enough shape that we could
apply it with little effort. That judgment was badly off, and again I
must apologize for it. I hope you won't get discouraged, and will
continue to work on an integrated autovacuum for 8.1.
FWIW, core has also agreed that we want to shoot for a much shorter
release cycle for 8.1 than we have had in the past couple of releases.
It seems likely that as the new 8.0 features are shaken out, 8.1 will
be mostly a mop-up development cycle, and that we will want to push it
out relatively soon (we're thinking of perhaps 3-4 months in
development, with a total release cycle of 6-7 months).
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend