Re: reducing the overhead of frequent table locks - now, with WIP patch
Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>
From: Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndquadrant.fr>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-06-06T19:52:43Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote: > * Dave Page (dpage@pgadmin.org) wrote: >> 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. > > So, with folks putting up that we should hammer this patch out and > force it into 9.1.. What should our new release date for 9.1 be? What > about other patches that didn't make it into 9.1? What about the > upcoming CommitFest that we've asked people to start working on? > > If we're going to start putting in changes like this, I'd suggest that > we try and target something like September for 9.1 to actually be > released. Playing with the lock management isn't something we want to > be doing lightly and I think we definitely need to have serious testing > of this, similar to what has been done for the SSI changes, before we're > going to be able to release it. Completely aside from the issue at hand, aren't we looking at a September release by now anyway (assuming we have to void late July/August as we usually do)? -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company