Re: Triaging the remaining open commitfest items

On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> * fsync $PGDATA recursively at startup
>
> Andres is the reviewer of record on this one.  He should either commit it
> if he feels it's ready, or bounce it to next CF if not.

I committed the first part of this as
2ce439f3379aed857517c8ce207485655000fc8e.  I think that we do not have
design consensus on the rest.  I think we should mark this committed,
and if the folks who proposed the further work here still want to
press their case, that should wait for 9.6.

> * Abbreviated key support for Datum sorts
>
> I've been assuming Robert would either commit this or not, since he's
> been the committer for the predecessor patches.

I'll deal with this.

> * Sequence Access Method
>
> Heikki's marked as reviewer, so it's his call as to whether this is ready,
> but the impression I have is that there's not really consensus as to
> whether the API is good.  If not, it's something I think we should push
> to 9.6.

I share your concern on this one.

> * ctidscan as an example of custom-scan
>
> This basically hasn't gotten any attention, which may mean nobody cares
> enough to justify putting it in the tree.  We need to either push it to
> next CF or reject altogether.

Agreed.  I was fine with never committing this.  I don't think we have
a requirement that every hook or bit of functionality we expose at the
C level must have an example in core.  But other people (you?  Simon?)
seemed to want a demonstration in the core repository.  If that's
still a priority, I am willing to work on it more for 9.6, but there
is not time now.

> * parallel mode/contexts
>
> Robert's patch, his to deal with (likewise for "assessing parallel-safety").

Most of the parallel mode stuff is committed.  What's left will have
to wait for 9.6.

Assessing parallel-safety will also need to wait for 9.6.

> * Join pushdown support for foreign tables
>
> There doesn't seem to be any current patch linked to this CF item.
> If there is a patch to get postgres_fdw to make use of the recently
> committed join-path support, I assume it's in need of a rebase anyway.

I think there is a rebased patch around.  I think it's just not linked
into the CF thread.  I don't think it's committable as is.

> * Grouping Sets
>
> I had originally promised to be committer for this one, and still want
> to go look at it, but Robert's nearby message about not committing stuff
> in haste definitely seems to apply.

I really feel we didn't give this a fair shake.  I'm not saying we
should make up for that by committing it in haste, but not giving
things a fair shake is bad for the project regardless of anything
else.

> * TABLESAMPLE clause
>
> I assume we'd better push this to 9.6 at this point.

+1

> * REINDEX xxx VERBOSE
>
> Seems like we just need somebody to make a decision on syntax.

I just posted a review of this raising minor points only.  If it is
timely revised, I will commit it.

> * Additional role attributes
>
> Is this ready to commit?  Stephen's call.

-1 for committing this, per discussion earlier today on a thread
that's probably not linked into the CF app.

> * catalog view to pg_hba.conf file
>
> Greg Stark is marked as committer of record on this.

I am doubtful whether this is ready.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company