On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > "Dave Page" <dp...@pgadmin.org> writes: >> On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 5:20 PM, Joshua D. Drake <j...@commandprompt.com> >> wrote: >>> Well its really nobody's fault except the hacker that didn't step up to >>> do the work. I believe all hackers have already been working diligently. > >> They have - but I see no reason why an imperfect process should delay >> the hard work of developers getting into the hands of users that want >> it for 12 months or more. > > How is it that this argument applies only to work not yet done, as > opposed to work that was already done and committed over the past 12 > months?
It doesn't - but those whose work has been committed haven't suffered due to the process. > Really it was possible to foresee this coming months ago. > We knew when we posted > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-05/msg00913.php > that it was very ambitious to hope for working replication in 8.4. > Then basically nothing happened all summer; Simon didn't ramp up > his effort until around September IIRC. He's done yeoman work > since then, but it can hardly be surprising that we're faced with > a slip-or-cut-the-feature decision now. Simon wasn't working on replication. He's been doing hot standby which has been feature-complete (bar the 2PC stuff which I believe Heikki wanted to hack about in some way) since some time before feature freeze. At this time it's being reviewed and refactored/debugged as a result of the feedback he's received which is precisely what feature freeze is for. The async replication I believe is not in such good shape, having been submitted in a working, but primitive form immediately prior to feature freeze. Although I'd love to see it included in 8.4 (in a form meeting our normal quality requirements of course), I can appreciate it should be bumped if it's not practical to bring it up to par in a reasonable timeframe. I don't believe that decision should be made until it has had a good first review by a couple of committers who can assess what might be required. If it's felt it can then be whipped into shape with a minor delay to the release, then I think it's worth the wait. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: 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