On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> writes: >> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> This is pretty much exactly how I see it. *Hot standby is not ready*, > >> So can you give us an idea of what parts of the code are in need of >> rethinking etc? I assume you've looked at it now if you can estimate >> it's going to take another 10 -12 months? > > No, I'm just estimating that based on the amount of design churn that's > still going on according to the mailing list discussions. I haven't > looked at the code at all. (If you expect me to sign off on it you can > figure it'll be a couple of months even for that to happen...)
Well there is one of the problems imho - the project is getting too big and the patches are getting too complex for us to be able to rely on you to sign off on every feature or major patch. We need put more trust in the judgement of the other committers and senior developers otherwise the project will simply bottleneck as you get more and more overworked. /me hopes that comes across as intended :-) -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
