On 09/25/2014 10:14 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 06:01:08PM +0200, Andres Freund wrote: >> But independent of which version is chosen, we *REALLY* need to make the >> decision soon. This issue has held up the next beta (like jsonb has >> blocked previous beta) for *weeks*. >> >> Personally it doesn't make me very happy that Heikki and Tom had to be >> the people stepping up to fix this. > > I think there are a few reasons this has been delayed, aside from the > scheduling ones: > > 1. compression issues were a surprise, and we are wondering if > there are any other surprises > 2. pg_upgrade makes future data format changes problematic > 3. 9.3 multi-xact bugs spooked us into being more careful > > I am not sure what we can do to increase our speed based on these items.
Alternately, this is delayed because: 1. We have one tested patch to fix the issue. 2. However, people are convinced that there's a better patch possible. 3. But nobody is working on this better patch except "in their spare time". Given this, I once again vote for releasing based on Tom's lengths-only patch, which is done, tested, and ready to go. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
