On Mar 26, 2012, at 5:36 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> 2. I'm not sure which patches Tom is planning to look at or in what >> order, so I've been avoiding the ones he seems to be taking an >> interest in. > > Well, I think I'm definitely on the hook for the pg_stat_statements, > pgsql_fdw, foreign table stats, and caching-stable-subexpressions > patches, and I should look at the libpq alternate row returning > mechanism because I suspect I was the last one to mess with that libpq > code in any detail. I don't claim any special insight into the other > stuff on the list. In particular I've not been paying much attention > to command triggers.
How long will that all take? I guess I'll work on command triggers, pg_archivecleanup, and buffer I/O timings next. > >> Personally, I am about at the point where I'd like to punt everything >> and move on. As nice as it would be to squeeze a few more things into >> 9.2, there WILL be a 9.3. If a few less people had submitted >> half-baked code at the last minute and a few more people had helped >> with review, we'd be done by now. > > The main reason I proposed setting a schedule a few weeks ago was that > I was afraid the commitfest would otherwise end precisely in a "we're > tired out, we're punting everything to 9.3" moment. Without some > definite goal to work towards, it'll just keep stretching out until > we've had enough. I'd prefer it end in a more orderly fashion than > that. The end result will be the same, in the sense that some of the > stuff that's still-not-ready-for-committer is going to get punted, > but people might have a less bad taste in their mouths about why. Fine. What do you propose, specifically? ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers