Re: Remaining items for 8.4 (was Re: [HACKERS] Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1710))

2009-03-17 Thread Heikki Linnakangas

Koichi Suzuki wrote:

I believe all the issues pointed out in
http://archives.postgresql.org//pgsql-hackers/2008-10/msg01387.php as
been covered in the current patch, as discussed with Simon.  I also
understand that we're running out of time.


I pointed out a few more issues here:

http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/49b51791.5080...@enterprisedb.com


I'd like to push this to pgFoundry first and then work again together
with Sync.Rep and Hot Standby for 8.5.


Great!

--
  Heikki Linnakangas
  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com

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


Re: Remaining items for 8.4 (was Re: [HACKERS] Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1710))

2009-03-17 Thread Koichi Suzuki
Sorry I see the comment.   I'll continue the work to fulfill the comment.

2009/3/17 Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com:
 Koichi Suzuki wrote:

 I believe all the issues pointed out in
 http://archives.postgresql.org//pgsql-hackers/2008-10/msg01387.php as
 been covered in the current patch, as discussed with Simon.  I also
 understand that we're running out of time.

 I pointed out a few more issues here:

 http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/49b51791.5080...@enterprisedb.com

 I'd like to push this to pgFoundry first and then work again together
 with Sync.Rep and Hot Standby for 8.5.

 Great!

 --
  Heikki Linnakangas
  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com




-- 
--
Koichi Suzuki
-
-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


Re: Remaining items for 8.4 (was Re: [HACKERS] Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1710))

2009-03-16 Thread Tom Lane
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
 Improve Performance of Multi-Batch Hash Join for Skewed Data Sets

 I believe everyone's happy with the performance testing that's been 
 done. Some of the logic ought to be moved to the planner, and maybe 
 there's some other cleanup to do.

I'll take this up next.  AFAIR refactoring to put that which should be
in the planner into the planner was the only significant issue.

regards, tom lane

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


Re: Remaining items for 8.4 (was Re: [HACKERS] Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1710))

2009-03-16 Thread Koichi Suzuki
Hi,

I believe all the issues pointed out in
http://archives.postgresql.org//pgsql-hackers/2008-10/msg01387.php as
been covered in the current patch, as discussed with Simon.  I also
understand that we're running out of time.

I'd like to push this to pgFoundry first and then work again together
with Sync.Rep and Hot Standby for 8.5.

2009/3/16 Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com:
 Bruce Momjian wrote:

 Well, we have been trying to go simplify the SE-PostgreSQL patch since
 September, and while we have made progress, we still have work to do,
 and at this point I think we have run out of time.  I think we have
 given it a fair shot, but I don't think it is going to make 8.4.

 Agreed. At some point we just have to wrap up and cut the release. Tweaking
 indefinitely is not fair to all those patches that have already been pushed
 back, nor to those that have already been committed and are waiting to be
 released as part of 8.4.

 Apart from SE-PostgreSQL, we have four remaining items on the commitfest
 page:

 GIN fast insert

 I agree with Tom that we should just disable regular index scans for GIN. If
 someone misses it in 8.4, we can try to find a way to do it safely in 8.5.
 Removing existing capability is a bit worrisome, but I'm even less happy
 with the out of memory condition in this patch and in the partial match
 patch that has been committed already. That really needs to be cleaned up.


 B-Tree emulation for GIN

 I think this is in pretty good shape.


 Improve Performance of Multi-Batch Hash Join for Skewed Data Sets

 I believe everyone's happy with the performance testing that's been done.
 Some of the logic ought to be moved to the planner, and maybe there's some
 other cleanup to do.


 Proposal of PITR performance improvement

 Hmm. The first version of this was submitted back in October, as an external
 tool. There's still some outstanding issues:
 http://archives.postgresql.org//pgsql-hackers/2008-10/msg01387.php. I think
 we should push this to 8.5, for the same reasons as SE-PostgreSQL. On the
 positive side, the external tool is on pgFoundry for use with 8.4 (and
 earlier releases too?).

 --
  Heikki Linnakangas
  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com

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




-- 
--
Koichi Suzuki

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