From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: release management team statement on patch reverts |
Date: | 2016-05-04 19:51:07 |
Message-ID: | 21036.1462391467@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)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==8K0Q@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
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-05-04 19:54:32 | Re: modifying WaitEventSets (was: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794) |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-05-04 19:45:42 | Re: modifying WaitEventSets (was: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794) |