On 2014-09-30 12:05:46 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > What's blocking it is that (afaik) no committer agrees with the approach
> > taken to solve the concurrency problems. And several (Heikki, Robert,
> > me) have stated their dislike of the proposed approach.
>
> Well, it depends on what you mean by "approach to concurrency
> problems". It's not as if a consensus has emerged in favor of another
> approach, and if there is to be another approach, the details need to
> be worked out ASAP.
Well. People have given you outlines of approaches. And Heikki even gave
you a somewhat working prototype. I don't think you can fairly expect
more.
> Even still, I would appreciate it if people could
> review the patch on the assumption that those issues will be worked
> out.
Right now I don't really see the point. You've so far shown no
inclination to accept significant concerns about your approach. And
without an agreement about how to solve the concurrency issues the
feature is dead in the water. And thus time spent reviewing isn't well
spent.
I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one feeling that way at this point.
> A couple of weeks
> ago, I felt good about the fact that it seemed "time was on my side"
> 9.5-wise, but maybe that isn't true. Working through the community
> process for this patch is going to be very difficult.
The community process involves accepting that your opinion isn't the
community's. Believe me, I learned that the hard way.
It's one thing to argue about the implementation of a feature for a week
or four. Or even insist that you're right in some implementation detail
local to your new code. But you've not moved one jota in the critical
parts that affect large parts of the system in half a year.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
-- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services
