Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
> Tom Lane is still chasing bugs with great efficiency,
Chasing 'em, anyway; no claims about efficiency :-). Most of the stuff
on my "to fix" list is not showstopper material; it'd be nice to get it
done before 6.5 but I won't feel bad if it isn't. There's always
another bug...
The two bugs I am really concerned about right now are the
inheritance-vs-GROUP-BY issue and the bogus-cache-entries-not-flushed-
at-xact-abort issue, because I am not sure I know enough to fix either
one right, and there is very little testing time left. These are bad
bugs, but they exist in older releases too, so maybe we should just
leave 'em alone for 6.5? Opinions? (There seem to be some nontrivial
open issues in locking and segmented relations, too, so maybe there is
enough stuff here to delay the release while we fix these things?)
> so an extra day
> to test a "candidate release tarball" (missing only a few of the docs)
> could certainly do no harm. If nothing else it would let us test the
> tarball to make sure that the yacc/bison file phasing is OK (this has
> bit us a few times recently).
In theory, that problem is Permanently Fixed, since the derived yacc
files are no longer in the CVS tree but are created on-the-fly during
tarball preparation. In practice, we should double-check it.
You've all seen this one, right?Q: What is the difference between theory and practice?A: In theory, there is no
difference.
regards, tom lane