Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.204.183])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 429CB63515B
	for <pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  1 Jun 2009 17:10:33 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia,
	port 10024) with ESMTP id 39182-01-3
	for <pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  1 Jun 2009 17:10:32 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from svr2.hagander.net (svr2.hagander.net [88.198.128.226])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C803D635253
	for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  1 Jun 2009 17:10:18 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from dynamic.hagander.net ([127.0.0.1]) (encrypted and
	authenticated) by svr2.hagander.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id
	02F48DCD43D; Mon,  1 Jun 2009 22:10:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mha-laptop.hagander.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CC42124113;
	Mon,  1 Jun 2009 22:08:17 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4A243530.4040702@hagander.net>
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 22:08:16 +0200
From: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090409)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
CC: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: It's June 1; do you know where your release is?
References: <19107.1243873940@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4A241973.9000307@agliodbs.com>
	<22967.1243885491@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <22967.1243885491@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200906/69
X-Sequence-Number: 139124

Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
>> # instrument the Windows shared memory reattachment problem?
>> -- as much as I'd like to do this, the solution could be as bad as the 
>> problem; we'd need more testing time for new instrumentation.  Will have 
>> to deal with via testing patched versions.
> 
> Yeah.  That was put on the list a month ago, when there was still plenty
> of time to do something about it; but since we missed getting it into
> beta2 I think it will have to wait.

Agreed. I did some mucking around with it, but the parts I found
reasonably easy to do were also reasonably useless :(

//Magnus