Re: scary patch contest

From: Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: scary patch contest
Date: 2026-08-26 00:58:36
Message-ID: CAMbWs48qgiuCG72=ALhy_kva3tS_2XWemnmnSh0dZFJsaZCmig@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Aug 26, 2026 at 3:54 AM Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> If we look back at previously released features, does anyone feel these
> PG 19 features received an unusualy high number of cleanup patches? And
> if so, are there more because of AI, as Melanie is asking?

Yeah, I feel the same way.

I expected that AI assistance would make new features more stable by
feature freeze, but it seems that that hasn't turned out to be the
case.

- Richard

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chao Li 2026-08-26 01:12:42 Re: pg_plan_advice: fix empty FOREIGN_JOIN sublist validation
Previous Message Ajin Cherian 2026-08-26 00:21:35 Re: Apply worker can pick an invalid index for REPLICA IDENTITY FULL lookups