On Tue, 2010-01-12 at 15:42 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: > > The final commit-fest is in 5 days --- this is not the time for design > > discussion and feature additions. > > +10 --- the one reason I can see for deciding to bounce SR is that there > still seem to be design discussions going on. It is WAY TOO LATE for > that folks. It's time to be thinking "what's the least we have to do to > make this shippable?"
I've not asked to bounce SR, I am strongly in favour of it going in, having been supporting the project on and off for 18 months. There is not much sense being talked here. I have asked for sufficient monitoring to allow us to manage it in production, which is IMHO the minimum required to make it shippable. This is a point I have mentioned over the course of many months, not a sudden additional thought. If the majority thinks that being able to find out the current replay point of recovery is all we need to manage replication then I will happily defer to that view, without changing my opinion that we need more. It should be clear that we didn't even have that before I raised the point. Overall, it isn't sensible or appropriate to oppose my viewpoint by putting words into my mouth that have never been said, which applies to most people's comments to me on this recent thread. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
