| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operations on the same table |
| Date: | 2017-06-08 17:59:00 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoY+YqCknUBpYy7RDHFiUV=sov4Ug8xjTfLV8RV+2SNwPw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
> On 06/08/2017 08:36 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> I freely admit I encouraged you to commit this. I did not imagine
>> that would be followed immediately by abdicating all responsibility
>> for it. My mistake, I guess.
>
> Robert, chill out.
That's probably good advice, but ...
> Kevin offered to revert. It's perhaps not the best way
> forward - I'm not familiar with the details here - but it's certainly one
> way to take responsibility.
... he also proposed to then commit it again for some future release
cycle, and what then? Revert it again if it turns out to have any
bugs, and commit it a third time in some release cycle after that?
It's a big, invasive patch. I don't think we want it going in and out
of the tree repeatedly. More generally, I don't think there's ever a
time when it's OK to commit a patch that you're not willing to put at
least some effort into fixing up afterwards.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2017-06-08 18:05:43 | Re: PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operations on the same table |
| Previous Message | Fabien COELHO | 2017-06-08 17:56:02 | Re: pgbench tap tests & minor fixes |