PostgreSQL 9.2 Open Items

From PostgreSQL wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Blockers for 9.2)
Line 9: Line 9:
 
* [http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/CAPpHfdvGticGniaj88VCHzHboXJobUhjLm6c09q_Op_u9EoBFg@mail.gmail.com GiST indexes vs fuzzy comparisons used by geometric types]
 
* [http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/CAPpHfdvGticGniaj88VCHzHboXJobUhjLm6c09q_Op_u9EoBFg@mail.gmail.com GiST indexes vs fuzzy comparisons used by geometric types]
 
** Alexander proposed a [http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/CAPpHfdsgk+N=kf+HUn7CUtg6ThNQcKH6q3VZZwUzsB3zpjpRfA@mail.gmail.com patch] that would support the current behavior, but should we change the behavior instead?
 
** Alexander proposed a [http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/CAPpHfdsgk+N=kf+HUn7CUtg6ThNQcKH6q3VZZwUzsB3zpjpRfA@mail.gmail.com patch] that would support the current behavior, but should we change the behavior instead?
* [http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/CAHGQGwGgPO6GUNQ99yry8ykpg6ZHfz1W4OMdvcPWf2vxVcZVtQ@mail.gmail.com WAL files which were restored from the archive are archived again.] [http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20120605063730.GA26031@tornado.leadboat.com thread continuation]
 
** [http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/CAHGQGwHVYqbX=A+zo+AvFbVHLGoypO9G_QDKbabeXgXBVGd05g@mail.gmail.com proposed patch]
 
 
* [http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/25939.1333551641@sss.pgh.pa.us Should we fix tuple limit handling, or redefine 9.x behavior as correct?]
 
* [http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/25939.1333551641@sss.pgh.pa.us Should we fix tuple limit handling, or redefine 9.x behavior as correct?]
 
** The consensus seems to be to change the documentation to match the current behavior.
 
** The consensus seems to be to change the documentation to match the current behavior.

Revision as of 10:27, 9 August 2012

Contents

Project Planning

See the PostgreSQL 9.2 Development Plan.

Meta-Issues

Blockers for 9.2

Not Blockers for 9.2

Resolved Issues

Personal tools