On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 9:46 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: > > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> I think there's no way that we wait more than one additional week to push > >> the fsync fix. So the problem is not with scheduling the update releases, > >> it's with whether we can also fit in a 9.5 beta release before PGCon. > > > I think 9.5 beta has to stand back. The question is what we do with the > > potentially two minor releases. Then we can slot in the beta whenever. > > > If we do the minor as currently planned, can we do another one the week > > after to deal with the multixact issues? (scheduling wise we're going to > > have to do one the week after *regardless*, the question is if we can make > > two different ones, or if we need to fold them into one) > > I suppose we could, but it doubles the amount of release gruntwork > involved, and it doesn't exactly make us look good to our users either.
Agreed. Makes it look like we can't manage to figure out our bugs and put fixes for them together in sensible releases..
The flipside of that is that we have a bug fix that's preventing peoples databases from starting, and we're the intentionally delaying the shipment of it. Though i guess a mitigating fact there is that it is very easy to manually recover from that. But it's painful if your db server restarts awhen you're not around...