Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

On 1 May 2015 at 18:05, Simon Riggs wrote: > * TABLESAMPLE clause >> Doesn't seem very far from being done. Some questions about including >> (or not) DDL and contrib modules seem to remain. >> > > Will commit this soon > OK, completely happy with this now and will commit today. It's fina

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

On 2015-05-01 18:37:23 +0200, Andres Freund wrote: > * Multivariate statistics > This is not intended to be committed this CF. > => I'd like to mark this as returned with (little) feedback. > > * Avoiding plan disasters with LIMIT > I'm not enthused by the approach, it's disabled by default t

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > > We really need to segregate the two.. By that what I mean is this: I > > want an "always-open" "bugfix" CF, which allows us to keep track of > > bugfix patches. Having something about

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > We really need to segregate the two.. By that what I mean is this: I > want an "always-open" "bugfix" CF, which allows us to keep track of > bugfix patches. Having something about "applies to versions X, Y, Z" > would be nice too... > > /me

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

2015-05-02 1:37 GMT+09:00 Andres Freund : > * ctidscan as an example of custom-scan > Hasn't really gotten sufficient review. > => Move > I have to agree. > * Join pushdown support for foreign tables > Hasn't gotten particularly much review yet. And it doesn't look > entirely ready to me o

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 10:07 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2015-04-30 08:39:45 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > If you have spare cycles, there are a number of relevant patches still > > open in the commit fest. > > I was wondering what the actual state of the commitfest is. I'm thus > going t

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 5:27 PM, Andrew Gierth wrote: > Also as I've pointed out, it's not even clear that there is a regression > at all, since I've already shown that changes of several percent in > timings of sort operations can be caused by irrelevant noise factors. > To actually show a perform

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

> "Andres" == Andres Freund writes: Andres> * Abbreviated key support for Datum sorts Andres> Unfortunately the discussion about potential performance Andres> regression has been largely sidestepped by bickering over Andres> minutiae. Andres> => ? There isn't a "potential perfor

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

On 01/05/15 18:37, Andres Freund wrote: I was wondering what the actual state of the commitfest is. I'm thus going through all the open items. Here's my thoughts: Cool. * Sequence Access Method There's been some back and forth between Petr and Heikki on this lately. => Maybe there's

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

Stephen Frost wrote: > Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote: >> * Allow "snapshot too old" error, to prevent bloat >> http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/1361166406.1897609.1424371443904.JavaMail.yahoo%40mail.yahoo.com >> talked about a new version that afaics never materialized >> =>

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

- Original Message - From: Stephen Frost To: Andres Freund Cc: Peter Eisentraut ; pgsql-hackers Sent: Friday, May 1, 2015 12:16 PM Subject: Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule Andres, * Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote: > On 2015-04-30 08:39:45 -0400, Pe

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

Andres, * Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote: > On 2015-04-30 08:39:45 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > If you have spare cycles, there are a number of relevant patches still > > open in the commit fest. > > I was wondering what the actual state of the commitfest is. I'm thus > going thro

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

On 2015-05-01 09:49:50 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > > * Abbreviated key support for Datum sorts > > Unfortunately the discussion about potential performance regression > > has been largely sidestepped by bickering over minutiae. > > =

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

On 2015-05-01 13:05:19 -0400, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 1 May 2015 at 12:37, Andres Freund wrote: > > * fastbloat > > Not too big, I think it should be easy to commit this. > > => Keep in 'ready for committer' > > > > Will commit soon Cool. > > * Allow "snapshot too old" error, to prevent bl

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

On 1 May 2015 at 12:37, Andres Freund wrote: > * fastbloat > Not too big, I think it should be easy to commit this. > => Keep in 'ready for committer' > Will commit soon > * Turning off HOT for larger SQL queries > Seems to have degenerated into a discussion of not really related > th

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > * Abbreviated key support for Datum sorts > Unfortunately the discussion about potential performance regression > has been largely sidestepped by bickering over minutiae. > => ? There really is no discussion about performance regression

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

On 2015-04-30 08:39:45 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > If you have spare cycles, there are a number of relevant patches still > open in the commit fest. I was wondering what the actual state of the commitfest is. I'm thus going through all the open items. Here's my thoughts: * fsync $PGDATA rec

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 1:55 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On 4/30/15 12:01 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> So generally we have stamped in late April or early May and released >>> in September, but last year we didn't release until December. I >

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 4/30/15 12:01 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> So generally we have stamped in late April or early May and released >> in September, but last year we didn't release until December. I >> assume that if we stamp beta1 in June instead of May, t

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

On 4/30/15 12:01 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > So generally we have stamped in late April or early May and released > in September, but last year we didn't release until December. I > assume that if we stamp beta1 in June instead of May, that's going to > somewhat delay the final release as well, but I

Re: [HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > The schedule > > calls for beta in June. In light of that, the core team has agreed to > call for > > feature freeze on May 15 > > That means that all patche

[HACKERS] feature freeze and beta schedule

The schedule calls for beta in June. In light of that, the core team has agreed to call for feature freeze on May 15 That means that all patches that add or change features should be committed by then. If you have