On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
>>> I think we can give Sync Rep until the 15th, given the pace of work on
>>> it. It is a major feature, and a complicated one.
>
>> Sure, but there are other features, major and minor, that we have
>> postponed to 9.2. In the normal course of events, sync rep would have
>> been marked Returned with Feedback a month ago. I like the feature,
>> but I have to say I'm not very pleased that we seem to have fallen
>> into a pattern of believing that some major features are somehow
>> exempted from the scheduling deadline and others are not.
>
> Yes. What are the rest of us supposed to do for the next two weeks,
> twiddle our thumbs?
>
> Personally I've got a couple of days' worth of cleanup tasks before I'd
> want to see us cut an alpha anyway, especially if we're going to try
> to accept the btree_gist KNNgist patch. Two weeks is too much though.
>
> I'd say that if there's a plausible chance that Sync Rep will be
> committable by the end of *this* week (and I mean Friday not Sunday),
> I'm willing to wait that long for it. Otherwise, it's 9.2 material.
I am quite sure that Simon will be able to get something committed
ahead of whatever deadline we choose to set. Whether that commit will
be up to our usual standards is another question altogether. The last
version posted to the list was trivial to break, and that was several
weeks ago.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company