On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> writes: >> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> I already pointed out some pretty serious problems with the updatable >>> views patch. Are you claiming they are trivial to fix? > >> Not at all. I think the deferral of that particular patch is the >> correct thing to do because there are confirmed, real problems with it >> that are not realistic to fix in an appropriate timeframe for the >> release. The primary case that I'm objecting to is HS which you've >> been saying will take 10 - 12 months to complete having by your own >> admission not looked at the code or followed the discussion >> particularly closely. > > Well, perhaps I'm being pessimistic, or perhaps you're being > optimistic. What is undeniable fact is that HS will not be committable > this week, which will make it three months since feature freeze. > As for when it *will* be committable --- Heikki is saying two weeks > if no new problems crop up, but given the rate at which new problems > have been found so far, what are the odds of that? We've seen this > movie before. > > Since it's going to take us two weeks to clean up the other loose ends > anyway, there's no harm in letting Simon and Heikki try to complete the > patch by then. But I'll happily lay a side bet with you about what the > situation will be two weeks from now.
I think Tom wins this bet, since it's now been four weeks. In fact, he was being optimistic: the loose ends aren't cleaned up either (based on a review of the wiki, we're about half way there: six patches have been committed in the intervening time and seven remain in the queue). ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
