On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 09:44:16AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > I don't know what the right thing to do is. I agree with everyone who > says this is a very important problem, and I have the highest respect > for Andres's technical ability. On the other hand, I have been around > here long enough to know that deciding whether to allow late commits > on the basis of how much we like the feature is a bad plan, because it > takes into account only the upside of a commit, and ignores the > possible downside risk. Typically, the commit is late because the > feature was rushed to completion at the last minute, which can have an > effect on quality. I can say, having read through the patches > yesterday, that they don't suck, but I can't say that they're fully > correct. That's not to say that we shouldn't decide to take them, but > it is a concern to be taken seriously. We have made mistakes before in > what we shipped that had serious implications for many users and for > the project; we should all be wary of making more such mistakes. I am > not trying to say that solving problems and making stuff better is NOT > important, just that every coin has two sides.
If we don't commit this, where does this leave us with the old_snapshot_threshold feature? We remove it in back branches and have no working version in PG 13? That seems kind of bad. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
