On 2021-May-11, Michael Paquier wrote: > Hmm. Is that really something we should do after feature freeze? A > 25% degradation for matview refresh may be a problem for a lot of > users and could be an upgrade stopper. Another thing we could do is > also to revert 7db0cd2 and 39b66a9 from the v14 tree, and work on a > proper solution for this performance problem for matviews for 15~. > > Thoughts?
My main thought while reading this thread is about the rules of feature freeze. I mean, we are indeed in feature freeze, so no new features should be added. But that doesn't mean we are in code freeze. For the period starting now and until RC (which is a couple of months away still) we should focus on ensuring that the features we do have are in as good a shape as possible. If that means adding more code to fix problems/bugs/performance problems in the existing code, so be it. I mean, reverting is not the only tool we have. Yes, reverting has its place. Moreover, threats of reversion have their place. People should definitely be working towards finding solutions to the problems in their commits lest they be reverted. However, freezing *people* by saying that no fixes are acceptable other than reverts ... is not good. So I agree with what Andres is saying downthread: let's apply the fix he proposed (it's not even that invasive anyway), and investigate the remaining 5% and see if we can find a solution. If by the end of the beta process we can definitely find no solution to the problem, we can revert the whole lot then. -- Álvaro Herrera 39°49'30"S 73°17'W
