Re: patch to allow disable of WAL recycling

Hi Robert,

I'm new to the Postgresql community, so I'm not familiar with how patches
are accepted here. Thanks for your detailed explanation. I do want to keep
pushing on this. I'll respond separately to Peter and to Tomas regarding
their emails.

Thanks again,
Jerry

On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 1:43 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 3:22 PM, Jerry Jelinek <jerry(dot)jelinek(at)joyent(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > I've gotten a wide variety of feedback on the proposed patch. The
> comments
> > range from rough approval through various discussion about alternative
> > solutions. At this point I am unsure if this patch is rejected or if it
> > would be accepted once I had the updated man page changes that were
> > discussed last week.
> >
> > I have attached an updated patch which does incorporate man page
> changes, in
> > case that is the blocker. However, if this patch is simply rejected, I'd
> > appreciate it if I could get a definitive statement to that effect.
>
> 1. There's no such thing as a definitive statement of the community's
> opinion, generally speaking, because as a rule the community consists
> of many different people who rarely all agree on anything but the most
> uncontroversial of topics. We could probably all agree that the sun
> rises in the East, or at least has historically done so, and that,
> say, typos are bad.
>
> 2. You can't really expect somebody else to do the work of forging
> consensus on your behalf. Sure, that may happen, if somebody else
> takes an interest in the problem. But, really, since you started the
> thread, most likely you're the one most interested. If you're not
> willing to take the time to discuss the issues with the individual
> people who have responded, promote your own views, investigate
> proposed alternatives, etc., it's unlikely anybody else is going to do
> it.
>
> 3. It's not unusual for a patch of this complexity to take months to
> get committed; it's only been a few weeks. If it's important to you,
> don't give up now.
>
> It seems to me that there are several people in favor of this patch,
> some others with questions and concerns, and pretty much nobody
> adamantly opposed. So I would guess that this has pretty good odds in
> the long run. But you're not going to get anywhere by pushing for a
> commit-or-reject-right-now. It's been less than 24 hours since Tomas
> proposed to do further benchmarking if we could agree on what to test
> (you haven't made any suggestions in response) and it's also been less
> than 24 hours since Peter and I both sent emails about whether it
> should be controlled by its own GUC or in some other way. The
> discussion is very much actively continuing. It's too soon to decide
> on the conclusion, but it would be a good idea for you to keep
> participating.
>
> --
> Robert Haas
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>