Re: reducing the overhead of frequent table locks - now, with WIP patch

On 06/06/2011 03:24 PM, Dave Page wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 8:12 PM, Dimitri Fontaine<dimitri@2ndquadrant.fr>  wrote:
>> So, to the question “do we want hard deadlines?” I think the answer is
>> “no”, to “do we need hard deadlines?”, my answer is still “no”, and to
>> the question “does this very change should be considered this late?” my
>> answer is yes.
>>
>> Because it really changes the game for PostgreSQL users.
> Much as I hate to say it (I too want to keep our schedule as
> predictable and organised as possible), I have to agree. Assuming the
> patch is good, I think this is something we should push into 9.1. It
> really could be a game changer.


I'm not a fan of hard and fast deadlines for releases - it puts too much 
pressure on us to release before we might be ready. But I'm also not a 
fan of totally abandoning our established processes, which accepting 
this would. I don't mind bending the rules a bit occasionally; I do mind 
throwing them out the door.

cheers

andrew