| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Online enabling of checksums |
| Date: | 2018-04-05 21:09:53 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-Wzk1tnVcGyUWyxDg98P9mqJvDe2EykbCPeUPxg5NnN+5BA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 1:27 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>>At least this patch was posted on the lists before commit, unlike many
>>others from many different people. And AFAIK there has never been such
>>a
>>rule.
The rules cannot possibly anticipate every situation or subtlety. The
letter of the law is a slightly distinct thing to its spirit.
> The more debatable a decision is, the more important it IMO becomes to give people a chance to object. Don't think there needs to be a hard rule to always announce an intent to commit.
+1
Andres' remarks need to be seen in the context of the past couple of
weeks, and in the context of this being a relatively high risk patch
that was submitted quite late in the cycle.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2018-04-05 21:13:45 | Re: Online enabling of checksums |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2018-04-05 21:08:51 | Re: Online enabling of checksums |