Re: [PATCH] pg_sleep(interval)

* Vik Fearing (vik(dot)fearing(at)dalibo(dot)com) wrote:
> I don't know if that's enough of a consensus to commit it, but I do
> think it's not nearly enough of a consensus to reject it.

This is actually a problem that I think we have today- the expectation
that *everyone* has to shoot down an idea for it to be rejected, but
one individual saying "oh, that's a good idea" means it must be
committed.

That's not how it works and there's no notion of "pending further
discussion" in the CF; imv that equates to "returned with feedback."
Marking this patch as 'Ready for Committer' when multiple committers
have already commented on it doesn't strike me as moving things forward
either.

As it relates to this specific patch for this CF, I'd go with 'Returned
with Feedback' and encourage you to consider the arguments for and
against, and perhaps try to find existing usage which would break due to
this change and consider the impact of changing it. For example, what
do the various languages and DB abstraction layers do today? Would
users of Hibernate likely be impacted or no? What about PDO?
Personally, I'm still on-board with the change in general, but it'd
really help to know that normal/obvious usage through various languages
won't be busted by the change.

Thanks,

Stephen