Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CE56632486 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:44:37 -0400 (AST) 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 42806-03 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:44:29 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.17.8]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6FA263242E for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:44:29 -0400 (AST) Received: from [192.168.1.3] (pool-96-244-14-10.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net [96.244.14.10]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrbap0) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0M8pEi-1NCu5q3vYa-00CmiB; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 20:44:24 +0100 Message-ID: <4B27E724.9000908@2ndquadrant.com> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:44:36 -0500 From: Greg Smith User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Haas CC: PostgreSQL-development , teodor@sigaev.ru Subject: Re: Closing out CommitFest 2009-11 References: <4B27C70F.1030603@2ndquadrant.com> <603c8f070912151012n60e8b963t69ef79577114d505@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <603c8f070912151012n60e8b963t69ef79577114d505@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------000103050401080600040604" X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19/HLa7OBC4r0A6Vw40taRZA/MOhhzY18uJbTZ o7bTQVMaaDuFiLXKgAnSH3HYk6NLpIQ13ZFaXSorko6pnEORIn AuKEtL/m5isZtFASmr0QMw7FS6DCcKx X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.598 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200912/1361 X-Sequence-Number: 152064 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------000103050401080600040604 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Greg Smith wrote: > >> -New VACUUM FULL >> > > I get the impression there is still some discussion that needs to > happen about the design of this. I think we should mark it Returned > with Feedback for now, and let whoever ends up working on it resubmit > whatever ends up getting agreed on. > Given that some of the issues here intertwine with Hot Standby integration, Simon has already said he'll work on getting this committed, executing on the plan outlined at http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/1260843982.1955.3436.camel@ebony I just pinged him, and even the first useful step there isn't going to wrap up in time for this CommitFest and therefore alpha3. Accordingly, this one is going to stay in "ready for committer" but slip past stamping the end of this CF. I've marked him as the committer there and bounced it forward to the next CF. Simon is still burning the midnight oil to get us a version of HS that can be committed, the hope is that it's ready to go tomorrow. I think the best we can do here is to block and/or document any known limitations/bugs, so long as the feature works for almost all use cases it seems worth including now. Given that there's a working VF rewrite patch that just needs final integration and testing, it seems reasonable to me to commit HS with a warning that VF still has open issues when combined with that feature. Then everyone can continue to work through removing any reason you'd need the problematic form of VF anyway, so that the caveat turns into a non-issue. I'm more concerned about making sure we get plenty of testing in on HS *alone* to make sure there aren't any non-HS regressions introduced by its changes, before that gets even more complicated by adding SR on top of it. As for the tsearch improvements, not to trivialize the patch, but I think this one will survive being committed between alpha3 & CF 2010-01 if it doesn't make it in this week. Teodor can work on getting that committed when he has time, I don't think we need to wait for it. Sounds like we just are waiting for Simon to finish up, which is expected to happen by tomorrow, and for Tom to wrap up working on the ProcessUtility_hook. That makes the first reasonable date to consider alpha3 packaging Thursday 12/17 I think. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support greg@2ndQuadrant.com www.2ndQuadrant.com --------------000103050401080600040604 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robert Haas wrote: 
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
  
-New VACUUM FULL
    

I get the impression there is still some discussion that needs to
happen about the design of this.  I think we should mark it Returned
with Feedback for now, and let whoever ends up working on it resubmit
whatever ends up getting agreed on.
Given that some of the issues here intertwine with Hot Standby integration, Simon has already said he'll work on getting this committed, executing on the plan outlined at http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/1260843982.1955.3436.camel@ebony

I just pinged him, and even the first useful step there isn't going to wrap up in time for this CommitFest and therefore alpha3.  Accordingly, this one is going to stay in "ready for committer" but slip past stamping the end of this CF.  I've marked him as the committer there and bounced it forward to the next CF.

Simon is still burning the midnight oil to get us a version of HS that can be committed, the hope is that it's ready to go tomorrow.  I think the best we can do here is to block and/or document any known limitations/bugs, so long as the feature works for almost all use cases it seems worth including now.  Given that there's a working VF rewrite patch that just needs final integration and testing, it seems reasonable to me to commit HS with a warning that VF still has open issues when combined with that feature.  Then everyone can continue to work through removing any reason you'd need the problematic form of VF anyway, so that the caveat turns into a non-issue.  I'm more concerned about making sure we get plenty of testing in on HS *alone* to make sure there aren't any non-HS regressions introduced by its changes, before that gets even more complicated by adding SR on top of it.

As for the tsearch improvements, not to trivialize the patch, but I think this one will survive being committed between alpha3 & CF 2010-01 if it doesn't make it in this week.  Teodor can work on getting that committed when he has time, I don't think we need to wait for it.

Sounds like we just are waiting for Simon to finish up, which is expected to happen by tomorrow, and for Tom to wrap up working on the ProcessUtility_hook.  That makes the first reasonable date to consider alpha3 packaging Thursday 12/17 I think.
-- 
Greg Smith    2ndQuadrant   Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg@2ndQuadrant.com  www.2ndQuadrant.com
--------------000103050401080600040604--