On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 09:50:25AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> > +1. Complexity has increased, and we are actually never at 100% sure >> > that a given bug fix does not have side effects on other things, hence >> > I think that a portion of this technical debt is the lack of >> > regression test coverage, for both existing features and platforms >> > (like Windows). The thing is that complexity has increased, but for >> > example for many features we lack test coverage, thinking mainly >> > replication-related stuff here. Of course we will never get to a level >> > of 100% of confidence with just the test coverage and the buildfarm, >> > but we should at least try to get closer to such a goal. >> >> FYI, I realize that one additional thing that has discouraged code >> reorganization is the additional backpatch overhead. I think we now >> need to accept that our reorganization-adverse approach might have cost >> us some reliability, and that reorganization is going to add work to >> backpatching. > > Actually, code reorganization in HEAD might cause backpatching to be > more buggy, reducing reliability --- obviously we need to have a > discussion about that.
As a result, IMO all the folks gathering to PGCon (won't be there sorry, but I read the MLs) should have a talk about that and define a clear list of items to tackle in terms of reorganization for 9.5, and then update this page: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.5_Open_Items This does not prevent to move on with all the current items and continue reviewing existing features that have been pushed of course. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
