Re: [HACKERS] 6.4.1 release

Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I think we should release 6.4.1 soon.

Well, portability bug reports and fixes still seem to be flowing in
at a great rate, so I don't think we can declare 6.4 frozen yet.
Maybe a 6.4.1 shortly to get the known problems, and expect 6.4.2
in another month or two?

regards, tom lane

On Thu, 10 Dec 1998, Tom Lane wrote:

> Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > I think we should release 6.4.1 soon.
>
> Well, portability bug reports and fixes still seem to be flowing in
> at a great rate, so I don't think we can declare 6.4 frozen yet.
> Maybe a 6.4.1 shortly to get the known problems, and expect 6.4.2
> in another month or two?

Works for me...let's say next Friday?

Marc G. Fournier
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org

> On Thu, 10 Dec 1998, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > > I think we should release 6.4.1 soon.
> >
> > Well, portability bug reports and fixes still seem to be flowing in
> > at a great rate, so I don't think we can declare 6.4 frozen yet.
> > Maybe a 6.4.1 shortly to get the known problems, and expect 6.4.2
> > in another month or two?
>
> Works for me...let's say next Friday?

Cool.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

> > Works for me...let's say next Friday?

Bruce, would you be willing to maintain a Status list for this minor
release? There are two or three patches floating around which would seem
to be candidates, and I suspect that there may be one or two things
someone (Tom Lane?) thinks I am looking at, but I'm not clear on what is
resolved and what is not.

So, a starting list:

Terry M.'s contrib addition
Tatsuo's Multi-Byte patches
Hiroshi's ParseComplexProject() patches
(should include regression example?)
Constantin's PgAccess patches
Possible portability problems with PgAccess and Tcl-8.1
Size int4 -> size_t in c.h (put off 'til v6.5?)

Anything else?

- Tom

Thomas G. Lockhart wrote:
>
> > > Works for me...let's say next Friday?
>
> Bruce, would you be willing to maintain a Status list for this minor
> release? There are two or three patches floating around which would seem
> to be candidates, and I suspect that there may be one or two things
> someone (Tom Lane?) thinks I am looking at, but I'm not clear on what is
> resolved and what is not.
>
> So, a starting list:
>
> Terry M.'s contrib addition
> Tatsuo's Multi-Byte patches
> Hiroshi's ParseComplexProject() patches
> (should include regression example?)
> Constantin's PgAccess patches
> Possible portability problems with PgAccess and Tcl-8.1
> Size int4 -> size_t in c.h (put off 'til v6.5?)
>
> Anything else?

I'd like to see Jans 2 patches, the LIMIT one and the one that
makes ORDER BY ose index if one is available (actually it omits the
unnecessary sort node if possible).

If you are unable to include them without regression tests, I can
try to think out some;

I guess the OR index patch is in CVS already.

------------
Hannu

> I'd like to see Jans 2 patches, the LIMIT one and the one that
> makes ORDER BY ose index if one is available (actually it omits the
> unnecessary sort node if possible).
>
> If you are unable to include them without regression tests, I can
> try to think out some;
>
> I guess the OR index patch is in CVS already.

Yes, the OR fix is in there. I need to look through my mailbox to see
if there is anything else that needs applying.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

On Fri, 11 Dec 1998, Hannu Krosing wrote:

> Thomas G. Lockhart wrote:
> >
> > > > Works for me...let's say next Friday?
> >
> > Bruce, would you be willing to maintain a Status list for this minor
> > release? There are two or three patches floating around which would seem
> > to be candidates, and I suspect that there may be one or two things
> > someone (Tom Lane?) thinks I am looking at, but I'm not clear on what is
> > resolved and what is not.
> >
> > So, a starting list:
> >
> > Terry M.'s contrib addition
> > Tatsuo's Multi-Byte patches
> > Hiroshi's ParseComplexProject() patches
> > (should include regression example?)
> > Constantin's PgAccess patches
> > Possible portability problems with PgAccess and Tcl-8.1
> > Size int4 -> size_t in c.h (put off 'til v6.5?)
> >
> > Anything else?
>
> I'd like to see Jans 2 patches, the LIMIT one and the one that
> makes ORDER BY ose index if one is available (actually it omits the
> unnecessary sort node if possible).

v6.4.1 is a bug fix release, no extra features will be added...Jan
is planning on releasing a 'LIMIT-patch' after v6.4.1 so that if someone
wants it, its there, but it will not be in the standard distribution until
v6.5...

Marc G. Fournier
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org

> > > Works for me...let's say next Friday?
>
> Bruce, would you be willing to maintain a Status list for this minor
> release? There are two or three patches floating around which would seem
> to be candidates, and I suspect that there may be one or two things
> someone (Tom Lane?) thinks I am looking at, but I'm not clear on what is
> resolved and what is not.

Only way to do it is cvs log, and run through my script, I get a nice
log of changes. I will do it soon, now that I have cleaned out my
mailbox of patches people wanted applied.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

Marc G. Fournier wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Dec 1998, Hannu Krosing wrote:
>
> > I'd like to see Jans 2 patches, the LIMIT one and the one that
> > makes ORDER BY ose index if one is available (actually it omits the
> > unnecessary sort node if possible).
>
> v6.4.1 is a bug fix release, no extra features will be added...Jan
> is planning on releasing a 'LIMIT-patch' after v6.4.1 so that if someone
> wants it, its there, but it will not be in the standard distribution until
> v6.5...

As it is already in the v6.4-feature-patch you'll find in the
patches directory on ftp.

Does anyone have experience with the patch suppressing sort
on ORDER BY? If so and experiences are positive, I would also
give it a try and include it into the feature patch of
v6.4.1.

Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#======================================== jwieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck) #

The Hermit Hacker wrote:
>
> On Fri, 11 Dec 1998, Hannu Krosing wrote:
>
> > Thomas G. Lockhart wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Works for me...let's say next Friday?
> > >
> > > Bruce, would you be willing to maintain a Status list for this minor
> > > release? There are two or three patches floating around which would seem
> > > to be candidates, and I suspect that there may be one or two things
> > > someone (Tom Lane?) thinks I am looking at, but I'm not clear on what is
> > > resolved and what is not.
> > >
> > > So, a starting list:
> > >
> > > Terry M.'s contrib addition
> > > Tatsuo's Multi-Byte patches
> > > Hiroshi's ParseComplexProject() patches
> > > (should include regression example?)
> > > Constantin's PgAccess patches
> > > Possible portability problems with PgAccess and Tcl-8.1
> > > Size int4 -> size_t in c.h (put off 'til v6.5?)
> > >
> > > Anything else?
> >
> > I'd like to see Jans 2 patches, the LIMIT one and the one that
> > makes ORDER BY ose index if one is available (actually it omits the
> > unnecessary sort node if possible).
>
> v6.4.1 is a bug fix release, no extra features will be added...Jan
> is planning on releasing a 'LIMIT-patch' after v6.4.1 so that if someone
> wants it, its there, but it will not be in the standard distribution until
> v6.5...

Aw... ;(p

When not accepting the ORDER BY patch into 6.4 the explanation was
that soon after 6.4 there will be a performance-enchancement release
(no new features) called 6.4.1 for things like this.

I guessed this would be the one.

And for me the ORDER BY patch is actually a bugfix - it enables me to
get at my huge table in a predictable order. Without the patch the same
query used to kill the computer.

(BTW, how could we test for such cases that exhaust some resources?
we obviously can't include them in standard regression tests)

And, I don't need the LIMIT patch nearly as much as ORDER BY,
I can do declare_cursor-move-fetch myself.

It would still be very nice if moving past end would not render
the cursor unusable.

-----
Hannu