On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 01:11:40PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: >Hi, > >On 2019-03-28 21:09:22 +0100, Michael Banck wrote: >> I agree that the current patch might have some corner-cases where it >> does not guarantee 100% accuracy in online mode, but I hope the current >> version at least has no more false negatives. > >False positives are *bad*. We shouldn't integrate code that has them. >
Yeah, I agree. I'm a bit puzzled by the reluctance to make the online mode communicate with the server, which would presumably address these issues. Can someone explain why not to do that?
I agree that this effort seems better spent on fixing those issues there (of which many are the same), and then re-use that.
FWIW I've initially argued against that, believing that we can address those issues in some other way, and I'd love if that was possible. But considering we're still trying to make that work reliably I think the reasonable conclusion is that Andres was right communicating with the server is necessary.
Of course, I definitely appreciate people are working on this, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion ...
