Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)

Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> I am a bit confused. To my eyes there's been a huge number of actually
> trivial patches in this commitfest? Even now, there's some:

> * Bugfix for timeout in LDAP connection parameter resolution
> * Problem with displaying "wide" tables in psql
> * Enable CREATE FOREIGN TABLE (... LIKE ... )
> * Add min, max, and stdev execute statement time in pg_stat_statement
> * variant of regclass etc.
> * vacuumdb: Add option --analyze-in-stages

> Are all small patches that don't need major changes before getting committed.

FWIW, I think the reason most of those aren't in is that there's not
consensus that it's a feature we want. Triviality of the patch itself
doesn't make it easier to get past that. (Indeed, when a feature patch
is actually trivial, that usually suggests to me that it's not been
thought through fully ...)

The LDAP one requires both LDAP and Windows expertise, which means the
pool of qualified committers for it is pretty durn small. I think
Magnus promised to deal with it, though.

> I think it'd be a different discussion if this where CF-1 or so. But
> we're nearly *2* months after the the *end* of the last CF.

Yeah. At this point the default decision has to be to reject (or
more accurately, punt to 9.5). I think we can still get a few of
these in and meet the mid-April target date, but many of them will
not make it.

regards, tom lane