Re: Should we remove a fallback promotion? take 2

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Should we remove a fallback promotion? take 2
Date: 2020-03-06 19:33:18
Message-ID: 20200306193318.GA2280@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2020-Mar-06, Michael Paquier wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 05, 2020 at 09:40:54AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > Seems reasonable, but it would be better if people proposed these
> > kinds of changes closer to the beginning of the release cycle rather
> > than in the crush at the end.
>
> +1, to both points.

Why? Are you saying that there's some actual risk of breaking
something? We're not even near beta or feature freeze yet.

I'm not seeing the reason for the "please propose this sooner in the
cycle" argument. It has already been proposed sooner -- seven years
sooner. We're not waiting for users to complain anymore; clearly nobody
cared.

I think dragging things forever serves no purpose.

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2020-03-06 19:35:46 Re: effective_io_concurrency's steampunk spindle maths
Previous Message Tom Lane 2020-03-06 19:30:36 Re: move DECLARE_INDEX from indexing.h?