Hello Bruce
Tom>> Possibly these commits need more review than you think.
Michaël> Shared feeling here, I think that this is still too early.
Michaël> FWIW, I am surprised that this patch series includes exactly zero line of code
Michaël> for tests, while the total amount of code committed is close to
Michaël> 3000 lines.
I intended to have a look at all that, but it got committed before I had
time to do it. Ok, I do not have much time these past months, but I've
been quite surprised anyway by the speed for such a feature/patch.
The feeling I expressed early in the thread is that the design should be
extendable, so that it does not fit only one particular use-case but fail
at any other that were not the author's, and a large reimplementation
would be needed to get them in. I was thinking of having a closer look
with that in mind. In particular and IMHO, the "master key" should not
(necessarily) be hold by a postgres process, not sure what the current
status is, but that is an example.
Committing such amount of codes and features without any test is much too
blunt. Why the rush?
Question: Should these patches be reverted till the stuff is properly
stabilized, tested and reviewed?
--
Fabien.
