Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> I guess you are saying that setting a cut-off was a bad idea, or that
> the cut-off was too close to the final release date. For me, I think
> there were three questions:
> 1. Were subtransactions acceptable, consensus no
> 2. Could trapping errors work for PG 15, consensus no
> 3. Could the feature be trimmed back for PG 15 to avoid these, consensus ?
We could probably have accomplished #3 if there was more time,
but we're out of time. (I'm not entirely convinced that spending
effort towards #3 was productive anyway, given that we're now thinking
about a much differently-scoped patch with API changes.)
> I don't think our community works well when there are three issues in
> play at once.
To the extent that there was a management failure here, it was that
we didn't press for a resolution sooner. Given the scale of the
concerns raised in June, I kind of agree with Andres' opinion that
fixing them post-freeze was doomed to failure. It was definitely
doomed once we reached August with no real work done towards it.
regards, tom lane
