On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:24:20AM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 8:03 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
2. The amount of pre-release testing we get from people outside the
hard-core development crowd seems to be continuing to decrease.
We were fortunate that somebody
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
2. It's not clear that we're going to have a particularly-impressive
list of major features for 9.5. So far we've got RLS and BRIN. I
expect that GROUPING SETS is far enough along that it should be
possible to get it in before development ends, and
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
So far, I haven't seen any features for 9.5 which would delay a more
timely release the way we did for 9.4. Anybody know of a bombshell
someone's going to drop on us for CF5?
I had wondered about that myself. What about
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 12:35 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Quite. So, here's a new thread.
MHO is that, although 9.4 has slipped more than any of us would like,
9.5 development launched right on time in August. So I don't see a
good reason to postpone 9.5 release just because 9.4
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
While there were technical
issues, 9.4 dragged a considerable amount because most people were
ignoring it in favor of 9.5 development.
I think 9.4 dragged almost entirely because of one issue: the
compressibility of JSONB.
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
While there were technical
issues, 9.4 dragged a considerable amount because most people were
ignoring it in favor of 9.5 development.
I think 9.4 dragged almost entirely because
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:37:32AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
2. It's not clear that we're going to have a particularly-impressive
list of major features for 9.5. So far we've got RLS and BRIN. I
expect that GROUPING SETS is far enough along that it should be
possible to get it in before
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:37:32AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
2. It's not clear that we're going to have a particularly-impressive
list of major features for 9.5.
How bad is the 9.5 feature list going to be compared to the 9.4 one that
had JSONB, but
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I think 9.4 dragged almost entirely because of one issue: the
compressibility of JSONB.
Meh. While we certainly weren't very speedy about resolving that,
I don't think that issue deserves all or even most of the blame.
I
Tom Lane-2 wrote
Robert Haas lt;
robertmhaas@
gt; writes:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Josh Berkus lt;
josh@
gt; wrote:
While there were technical
issues, 9.4 dragged a considerable amount because most people were
ignoring it in favor of 9.5 development.
I think 9.4 dragged
David G Johnston wrote
Tom Lane-2 wrote
Robert Haas lt;
robertmhaas@
gt; writes:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Josh Berkus lt;
josh@
gt; wrote:
While there were technical
issues, 9.4 dragged a considerable amount because most people were
ignoring it in favor of 9.5 development.
On 12/11/2014 06:59 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I think 9.4 dragged almost entirely because of one issue: the
compressibility of JSONB.
Meh. While we certainly weren't very speedy about resolving that,
I don't think that issue
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 7:37 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
2. It's not clear that we're going to have a particularly-impressive
list of major features for 9.5. So far we've got RLS and BRIN. I
expect that GROUPING SETS is far enough along that it should be
possible to get it in
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 8:03 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
2. The amount of pre-release testing we get from people outside the
hard-core development crowd seems to be continuing to decrease.
We were fortunate that somebody found the JSONB issue before it was
too late to do anything
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 7:37 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
2. It's not clear that we're going to have a particularly-impressive
list of major features for 9.5. So far we've got RLS and BRIN. I
expect that
On 12/11/2014 09:22 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I imagine that it's the same for everyone else. Many of the patches that
sit in the commitfest for weeks are patches that no-one really cares
much about. I'm not sure what to do about that. It would be harsh to
reject a patch just because
On 12/11/2014 08:59 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
More abstractly, there's a lot of value in having a predictable release
schedule. That's going to mean that some release cycles are thin on
user-visible features, even if just as much work went into them. It's
the nature of the game.
+ 1,000,000 from
On 12/11/2014 08:51 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 12/11/2014 09:22 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I imagine that it's the same for everyone else. Many of the patches that
sit in the commitfest for weeks are patches that no-one really cares
much about. I'm not sure what to do about that. It would be
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
That's one thought. Robert said the same thing about when he was the
commitfest manager; he just reviewed most the patches himself in the end.
And you mentioned that Tom used to review 70% of all incoming patches. How
about we make that official? It's the commitfest
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
The problem with that is that we'll have a hard time to find volunteers for
that. But we only need to find one sucker for each commitfest. I can
volunteer to do that once a year; if the other active committers do
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Version 1.0 of INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE was posted in August -
when development launched. It still doesn't have a reviewer, and it
isn't actually in evidence that someone else has so much as downloaded
and applied
Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
The problem with that is that we'll have a hard time to find volunteers for
that. But we only need to find one sucker for each commitfest. I can
volunteer to do that once a year; if the
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 11:59:58AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
The problem is that, on the one hand, we have a number of serious
problems with things that got committed and turned out to have
problems - the multixact stuff, and JSONB, in particular - and on the
other hand, we are lacking in
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
On 12/11/2014 08:51 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 12/11/2014 09:22 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Perhaps we should change the process so that it is the patch author's
responsibility to find a reviewer, and a
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree. Having your patch disappear into the void is not friendly at all.
But I don't think a commentless -1 is the answer, either. That might one
of the few things worse than silence. Even if the comment is just This
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:04:43AM -0700, David G Johnston wrote:
Tom Lane-2 wrote
Robert Haas lt;
robertmhaas@
gt; writes:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Josh Berkus lt;
josh@
gt; wrote:
While there were technical
issues, 9.4 dragged a considerable amount because most
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:04:43AM -0700, David G Johnston wrote:
Tom Lane-2 wrote
Robert Haas lt;
robertmhaas@
gt; writes:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Josh Berkus lt;
josh@
gt; wrote:
FWIW I don't think any amount of process would have gotten multixact to
not have the copious bugs it had. It was just too complex a patch,
doing ugly things to parts too deeply linked to the inner guts of the
server. We might have spared a few with some extra testing (such as the
idiotic
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Review is good, but (as history shows) some bugs can slip through even
extensive review such as the one multixacts got from Noah and Andres.
Had anyone put some real stress on the beta, we could have noticed some
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
On 12/10/2014 05:14 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Andres Freund (and...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
But the scheduling of commits with regard to the 9.5 schedule actually
opens a relevant question: When are we planning to release 9.5? Because
If we try ~ one
On 12/10/2014 09:35 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
On 12/10/2014 05:14 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Andres Freund (and...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
But the scheduling of commits with regard to the 9.5 schedule actually
opens a relevant question: When are we planning to
31 matches
Mail list logo
