On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 09:44:16AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I don't know what the right thing to do is. I agree with everyone who
> says this is a very important problem, and I have the highest respect
> for Andres's technical ability. On the other hand, I have been around
> here long enough to know that deciding whether to allow late commits
> on the basis of how much we like the feature is a bad plan, because it
> takes into account only the upside of a commit, and ignores the
> possible downside risk. Typically, the commit is late because the
> feature was rushed to completion at the last minute, which can have an
> effect on quality. I can say, having read through the patches
> yesterday, that they don't suck, but I can't say that they're fully
> correct. That's not to say that we shouldn't decide to take them, but
> it is a concern to be taken seriously. We have made mistakes before in
> what we shipped that had serious implications for many users and for
> the project; we should all be wary of making more such mistakes. I am
> not trying to say that solving problems and making stuff better is NOT
> important, just that every coin has two sides.
If we don't commit this, where does this leave us with the
old_snapshot_threshold feature? We remove it in back branches and have
no working version in PG 13? That seems kind of bad.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
