On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 11:44:46PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Geoghegan <p...@heroku.com> writes: > > I think that those are objectively very large reductions in a cost > > that figures prominently in most workloads. Based solely on those > > facts, but also on the fairly low complexity of the patch, it may be > > worth considering committing this before 9.4 goes into feature freeze, > > Personally, I have paid no attention to this thread and have no intention > of doing so before feature freeze. There are three dozen patches at > https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/commitfest_view?id=21 > that have moral priority for consideration for 9.4. Not all of them are > going to get in, certainly, and I'm already feeling a lot of guilt about > the small amount of time I've been able to devote to reviewing/committing > patches this cycle. Spending time now on patches that didn't even exist > at the submission deadline feels quite unfair to me. > > Perhaps I shouldn't lay my own guilt trip on other committers --- but > I think it would be a bad precedent to not deal with the existing patch > queue first.
+1 -- Noah Misch EnterpriseDB 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
