Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> The PostgreSQL 9.6 release management team has determined that there
> is insufficient consensus at this time to revert any of the patches
> mentioned in
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+TgmoYOWTtBQEL+Bv=w93bvUjbXSUw3uGnp+R29dduZ==8...@mail.gmail.com
> because, with the exception of "snapshot too old", none of those
> patches have attracted more than a single vote to revert. While
> "snapshot too old" has attracted three votes to revert (Tom, Bruce,
> Andres), one of those was on the grounds of not liking the feature i
> general rather than any specific problem with the implementation (Tom)
> and another gave no reason at all (Bruce). When originally proposed,
> there was clear consensus that the feature was useful, so any revert
> should be on the grounds that the current implementation is flawed.
... which, indeed, is precisely what Andres is asserting, no? I do
not understand your conclusion.
If the threshold is "more than one vote to revert", I'm sure that can
be arranged. For the most part I think people have assumed that if
one senior hacker complains about something, it's not really necessary
for other people to duplicate that person's review effort. We don't
have a surplus of manpower available for such things, and I believe
most of us are going flat out right now anyway trying to get ready
for beta. Duplicate reviews are hard to come by.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
