"Kevin Grittner" <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Well, the bottom line that's concerning me here is whether >> throwing errors is going to push anyone's application into an >> unfixable corner. I'm somewhat encouraged that your Circuit >> Courts software can adapt to it, since that's certainly one of >> the larger and more complex applications out there. Or at least I >> would be if you had actually verified that the CC code was okay >> with the recently-proposed patch versions. Do you have any >> thorough tests you can run against whatever we end up with? > To test the new version of this patch, we would need to pick an > application release, and use the patch through the development, > testing, and staging cycles, We would need to look for all > triggers needing adjustment, and make the necessary changes. We > would need to figure out which triggers were important to cover, > and ensure that testing covered all of them. > > Given the discussions with my new manager this past week, I'm > pretty sure we can work this into a release that would complete > testing and hit pilot deployment in something like three months, > give or take a little. I can't actually make any promises on that > until I talk to her next week. After a couple meetings, I have approval to get this into an application release currently in development. Assuming that your patch from the 13th is good for doing the testing, I think I can post test results in about three weeks. I'll also work on a follow-on patch to add couple paragraphs and an example of the issue to the docs by then. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
