On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 10:06:52AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> If that means it's stable, +1 from me.
>>
>> I dispute, on every level, the notion that not releasing a beta means
>> that we can't work on things in parallel. We can work on all of the
>> things on the open items list in parallel right now. We can also
>> test. And in fact, we should test. It's entirely appropriate to test
>> our own stuff before we ask other people to test it. It's also
>> appropriate to fix the things that we already know are broken before
>> we ask other people to test it.
>
> Let me share something that people have told me privately but don't want
> to state publicly (at least with attribution), and that is that we have
> seen great increases in feature development (often funded), without a
> corresponding increase development efforts focused on stability. The
> fact Alvaro has had to almost single-handedly fix multi-xact bug until
> very recently is testament to that.
It's clear - at least to me - that we need to put more resources into
stabilizing the new multixact system. This is killing us. If we can't
stabilize this, people will go use some other database.
Equally importantly, we need to make sure that we never release
something comparably broken ever again. And that's why I'm not
sanguine about shipping what we've got without adequate reflection.
What, in this release, could break things badly? RLS? Grouping sets?
Heikki's WAL format changes? That last one sounds really scary to me;
it's painful if not impossible to fix the WAL format in a minor
release.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
