Hi, When I started writing this, there were the following reamining CF items, minus bugfix ones which aren't bound by the code freeze.
I think it makes sense to go through those and see whether it's realistic to commit any of them. Ready for Committer: Add GUCs for predicate lock promotion thresholds: - claimed by Kevin, should be easy enough initdb configurable wal_segment_size - parts have been committed - significantly derailed by segment naming discussion - possibly committable if we decide to skip the naming bit? But also a bit late given that it touches some quite sensitive code. Create fdw_outerpath for foreign - haven't really followed discussion - only marked as ready-for-committer 2017-04-04 Vacuum: allow usage of more than 1GB of work mem - hm, maybe? Will take a look. Unique Joins - Tom's discussing things with David, not sure. Push down more UPDATEs/DELETEs in postgres_fdw - claimed by Robert? postgres_fdw: support parameterized foreign joins - think that depends on fdw_outerpath? Waiting on Author: SQL statements statistics counter view (pg_stat_sql) - the code doesn't look quite ready - don't think we quite have design agreement, e.g. I don't like where it's hooked into query execution Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM) - fair number of people don't think it's ready for v10. - can't move to next fest because it's waiting-on-author, which doesn't allow that. Doesn't strike me as a useful restriction. BRIN optimize memory allocation - I think Alvaro has indicated that he wants to take care of that? Indexes with Included Columns (was Covering + unique indexes) - Don't think concerns about #columns on truncated tuples have been addressed. Should imo be returned-with-feedback. Needs-Review: Better estimate merging for duplicate vars in clausesel.c - has been submitted pretty late (2017-02-24) and discussion is ongoing - I'm inclined to punt on this one to the next release, previous proposal along that line got some pushback new plpgsql extra_checks - Winner of the "most opaque CF title" award - hasn't received a whole lot of review - don't think we're even close to having design agreement Generic type subscripting - still some review back and forth - probably should be punted Any comments? Greetings, Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
