Re: [HACKERS] do we need to postpone beta4?

2010-07-28 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > So now we have the following issues remaining: > * page corruption after moving tablespace > * ExplainOnePlan handles snapshots differently than ProcessQuery > * name and comment of XLogSetAsyncCommitLSN() should be changed > * Documentation fails to build as PDF > ...and I

Re: [HACKERS] do we need to postpone beta4?

2010-07-28 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> Well, that's pretty much saying we won't release before September. > > Yup, that's what I think.  In fact I think September might be > optimistic.  This is what happens when you fork early and allow > developers to start fo

Re: [HACKERS] do we need to postpone beta4?

2010-07-27 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 6:42 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 4:48 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Yup, that's what I think.  In fact I think September might be optimistic.  This is what happens when you f

Re: [HACKERS] do we need to postpone beta4?

2010-07-27 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 4:48 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Yup, that's what I think.  In fact I think September might be >>> optimistic.  This is what happens when you fork early and allow >>> developers to start focusing on

Re: [HACKERS] do we need to postpone beta4?

2010-07-27 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 4:48 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Robert Haas writes: >>> Well, that's pretty much saying we won't release before September. >> >> Yup, that's what I think.  In fact I think September might be >> optimistic.  This is what ha

Re: [HACKERS] do we need to postpone beta4?

2010-07-27 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> Well, that's pretty much saying we won't release before September. > > Yup, that's what I think.  In fact I think September might be > optimistic.  This is what happens when you fork early and allow > developers to start fo

Re: [HACKERS] do we need to postpone beta4?

2010-07-27 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > Well, that's pretty much saying we won't release before September. Yup, that's what I think. In fact I think September might be optimistic. This is what happens when you fork early and allow developers to start focusing on new development instead of testing the release bra

Re: [HACKERS] do we need to postpone beta4?

2010-07-27 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 3:53 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> Well, that's pretty much saying we won't release before September. >> Which is kind of a bummer, but I guess that's what happens when we get >> into vacation season. > > Yeah, if we are lucky we can do RC1 in mid-August and still release > f

Re: [HACKERS] do we need to postpone beta4?

2010-07-27 Thread Bruce Momjian
Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Robert Haas writes: > >> I think we should consider postponing beta4. ?I count eleven > >> non-documentation, 9.0-specific bug fix on REL9_0_STABLE, but there > >> are currently five items on the open 9.0 issues list, at le

Re: [HACKERS] do we need to postpone beta4?

2010-07-27 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> I think we should consider postponing beta4.  I count eleven >> non-documentation, 9.0-specific bug fix on REL9_0_STABLE, but there >> are currently five items on the open 9.0 issues list, at least one of >> which appears t

Re: [HACKERS] do we need to postpone beta4?

2010-07-27 Thread Joshua D. Drake
On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 14:11 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: > > I think we should consider postponing beta4. I count eleven > > non-documentation, 9.0-specific bug fix on REL9_0_STABLE, but there > > are currently five items on the open 9.0 issues list, at least one of > > which appe

Re: [HACKERS] do we need to postpone beta4?

2010-07-27 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > I think we should consider postponing beta4. I count eleven > non-documentation, 9.0-specific bug fix on REL9_0_STABLE, but there > are currently five items on the open 9.0 issues list, at least one of > which appears to be a new bug in 9.0, and we just got a bug report on >

[HACKERS] do we need to postpone beta4?

2010-07-27 Thread Robert Haas
I think we should consider postponing beta4. I count eleven non-documentation, 9.0-specific bug fix on REL9_0_STABLE, but there are currently five items on the open 9.0 issues list, at least one of which appears to be a new bug in 9.0, and we just got a bug report on pgsql-bugs from Valentine Gogi