Re: 8.2 features status

From: andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>, "Robert Treat" <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Rick Gigger" <rick(at)alpinenetworking(dot)com>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Gavin Sherry" <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>
Subject: Re: 8.2 features status
Date: 2006-08-06 01:41:39
Message-ID: 1380.24.211.165.134.1154828499.squirrel@www.dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
>> On Sat, Aug 05, 2006 at 12:19:54AM -0400, Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
>>> FTI is a biggie in my mind. I know it ain't happening for 8.2, but is
>>> the general plan to integrate TSearch2 directly into the backend?
>
>> When the Tsearch developers say so I think.
>
> Yeah, that's my take too. Oleg and Teodor obviously feel it's not "done"
> yet, and ISTM leaving it in contrib gives them more flexibility in a
> couple of ways:
> * they can make user-visible API changes without people getting as upset
> as if they were changing core features;
> * because it is a removable contrib module, they can (and do) offer
> back-ports of newer versions to existing PG release branches.
>
> I think some descendant of tsearch2 will eventually be in core, but
> we'll wait till we're pretty certain it's feature-stable.
>

My impression from this post
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-07/msg00556.php was that
moving it into core should be doable for 8.3. I hope I didn't
misunderstand.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-08-06 01:46:56 Re: pg_upgrade (was: 8.2 features status)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-08-06 01:20:05 Corner case in xlog stuff: what happens exactly at a seg boundary?