> Is WAL planned for 7.1? What is the story with WAL?
Yes.
> I'm a bit concerned that the current storage manager is going to be
> thrown in the bit bucket without any thought for its benefits. There's
> some stuff I want to do with it like resurrecting time travel,
Why don't use triggers for time-travel?
Disadvantages of transaction-commit-time based time travel was pointed out
a days ago.
> some database replication stuff which can make use of the non-destructive
It was mentioned here that triggers could be used for async replication,
as well as WAL.
> storage method etc. There's a whole lot of interesting stuff that can be
> done with the current storage manager.
Vadim