On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 09:50:25AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> > +1. Complexity has increased, and we are actually never at 100% sure
>> > that a given bug fix does not have side effects on other things, hence
>> > I think that a portion of this technical debt is the lack of
>> > regression test coverage, for both existing features and platforms
>> > (like Windows). The thing is that complexity has increased, but for
>> > example for many features we lack test coverage, thinking mainly
>> > replication-related stuff here. Of course we will never get to a level
>> > of 100% of confidence with just the test coverage and the buildfarm,
>> > but we should at least try to get closer to such a goal.
>>
>> FYI, I realize that one additional thing that has discouraged code
>> reorganization is the additional backpatch overhead. I think we now
>> need to accept that our reorganization-adverse approach might have cost
>> us some reliability, and that reorganization is going to add work to
>> backpatching.
>
> Actually, code reorganization in HEAD might cause backpatching to be
> more buggy, reducing reliability --- obviously we need to have a
> discussion about that.
As a result, IMO all the folks gathering to PGCon (won't be there
sorry, but I read the MLs) should have a talk about that and define a
clear list of items to tackle in terms of reorganization for 9.5, and
then update this page:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.5_Open_Items
This does not prevent to move on with all the current items and
continue reviewing existing features that have been pushed of course.
--
Michael
