Re: Key management with tests

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Key management with tests
Date: 2021-01-15 21:47:19
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 04:23:22PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 3:49 PM Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > I am planning to apply this next week.
> I don't think that's appropriate. Several prominent community members
> have told you that the patch, as committed the first time, needed a
> lot more work. There hasn't been enough time between then and now for
> you, or anyone, to do that amount of work. This patch needs detailed
> and substantial review from senior community members, and multiple
> rounds of feedback and improvement, before it should be considered for
> commit.
> I am not even sure there is a consensus on the design, without which
> any commit is always premature.

If people want changes, I need to hear about it here. I have address
everything people have mentioned in these threads so far.

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>

The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2021-01-15 21:51:56 Re: Change default of checkpoint_completion_target
Previous Message Tom Lane 2021-01-15 21:46:43 Re: patch: reduce overhead of execution of CALL statement in no atomic mode from PL/pgSQL