Re: scary patch contest

On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 02:53:54PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 02:50:37PM -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
>> I don't feel like there is consensus that we need to revert this yet.
>> One thing that I'm wondering is if the ease with which LLMs allow
>> people to pressure test features means we are finding more bugs sooner
>> than we have in the past. With online checksums, as far as I
>> understand, the design has consensus and the implementation has
>> required follow-on commits but not more than other similar sized
>> features that weren't reverted. I understand that the concern is 1)
>> data corruption is especially bad and 2) if there were bugs so far,
>> who knows what more could be lurking. But I tend to wonder if 2 is
>> changing because of how easy it is to look for bugs now.
>
> 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?

I do get the feeling that we're finding more with LLMs. Beyond that, the
RMT can use LLMs to easily find threads that ought to be added as open
items but weren't for whatever reason (e.g., the barrage of e-mails I just
sent out).

--
nathan