On 8 October 2012 21:35, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey, if me deciding I don't want to work on a patch any more is going > to make you feel slighted, then you're out of luck. The archives are > littered with people who have decided to stop working on things > because the consensus position on list was different than the approach > that they personally favored, and I have as much right to do that as > anyone else.
Sure you do. However, I doubt very many of those who gave up did so over so trivial an issue as to how to grow a buffer somewhere, and those that did usually did not go on to become major contributors, and certainly not committers. The buffer thing is, as far as I know, the single solitary point of contention with this patch. We're talking about 2 lines of code. To give up now is just petulant. There is no other way of looking at it. > It is not as if anyone has phrased this as a maybe-we-should > sort of argument; there have been quite definite arguments on both > sides over apparently strongly-held positions. I had hoped that this > was going to be a quick and non-controversial win, but 74 email > messages later it has become clear that it will be neither of those > things. Many of those 74 emails concerned my completely unrelated digression into exploiting strxfrm(); we spent a ridiculously long time discussing how to size this buffer, but it still wasn't anything like 74 messages. -- Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
