On 2015-06-08 13:44:05 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I understand the overreaction/underreaction debate. Here were my goals
> in this discussion:
>
> 1. stop worry about the 9.5 timeline so we could honestly assess our
> software - *done*
> 2. seriously address multi-xact issues without 9.5/commit-fest pressure -
> *in process*
> 3. identify any other areas in need of serious work
>
> While I like the list you provided, I don't think we can be effective in
> an environment where we assume every big new features will have problems
> like multi-xact. For example, we have not seen destabilization from any
> major 9.4 features, that I can remember anyway.
>
> Unless there is consensus about new areas for #3, I am thinking we will
> continue looking at multi-xact until we are happy, then move ahead with
> 9.5 items in the way we have before.
I think one important part is that we (continue to?) regularly tell our
employers that work on pre-commit, post-commit review, and refactoring
are critical for their long term business prospects. My impression so
far is that that the employer side hasn't widely realized that fact, and
that many contributors do the review etc. part in their spare time.
Andres
