Re: reducing the overhead of frequent table locks - now, with WIP patch

Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 6:02 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Just to set the record straight on this ... the vxid patch went in on
>> 2007-09-05:
>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2007-09/msg00026.php
>> which was a day shy of a month before we wrapped 8.3beta1:
>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2007-10/msg00089.php
>> so it was during alpha phase not beta. And 8.3RC1 was stamped on
>> 2008-01-03. So Simon's assertion that this was "days before we produced
>> a release candidate" is correct, if you take "days" as "4 months".

> The patch went in slightly more than 6 months after feature freeze,
> even though it was written by a summer student and did not even pass
> review by the student's mentor (me).

I'm not sure why you're having such a hard time distinguishing "before
beta" from "after beta", but in any case please notice that you're
describing a cycle where we spent nine months in feature freeze.
Nobody else here is going to hold that up as an example of sound project
management that we ought to repeat. And the way to not repeat it is to
not accept risky new patches late in the cycle.

(This may be something of an apples-to-oranges comparison, though, since
as best I can tell from a quick look in the archives, we were not then
using the term "feature freeze" the same as we are now --- 2007-04-01
seems to have been the point that we would now call "beginning of the
last CF", ie, all feature patches for 8.3 were supposed to have been
*submitted*, not necessarily committed. And we had a lot of them
pending at that point, because of lack of the CF process to get things
in earlier.)

regards, tom lane