On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 10:08:07AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 11:09 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 01:46:24PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >> > I agree with you that some worst case performance tests should be > >> > done. Could you please say what you think the worst cases would be, so > >> > those can be tested? That would avoid wasting time or getting anything > >> > backwards. > >> > >> I've thought about this some and here's what I've come up with so far: > > > > I question whether we are in a position to do the testing necessary to > > commit this for 9.2. > > Is anyone even working on testing it?
No one I know of. I am just trying to set expectations that this still has a long way to go. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
