Horton

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

Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>

View thread
From: Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>
To: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndquadrant.fr>
Cc: 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: 2011-06-06T19:24:33Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
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.

-- 
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company