| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql: doc: remove verbiage about "receiving" data from rep. slots |
| Date: | 2025-11-19 16:02:08 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoba9=y2qN+g_=xR3kD7i3Bp78q-+cZ-xO-jiYpC-ff0Jg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 12:14 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> I'm rather baffled by the process here. You pushed a patch, without any
> review, which also wasn't previously posted publicly, that made things
> worse. Then, after you got pushback on that change, you posted another patch,
> that got mildly negative feedback. Then you also pushed that change.
I'm not totally sure that we're in a worse place after these changes
than we were before them, but I strongly agree that committing a
change with no previous public discussion is a thing that generally
should not happen.
I mean, if the buildfarm is broken, pushing a fix quickly is
absolutely the right thing to do, but if you think the documentation
needs improving, there's no reason not to discuss that on
pgsql-hackers before pushing.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-11-19 16:02:35 | pgsql: doc: Update formula for vacuum insert threshold. |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2025-11-19 09:41:57 | pgsql: Fix indentation |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-11-19 16:08:37 | Re: Trigger more frequent autovacuums of heavy insert tables |
| Previous Message | Ilia Evdokimov | 2025-11-19 15:52:08 | Re: Use merge-based matching for MCVs in eqjoinsel |