Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode

Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
To: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, pgsql-core <pgsql-core@postgresql.org>
Date: 2015-06-04T14:43:17Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Josh,

* Josh Berkus (josh@agliodbs.com) wrote:
> I would argue that if we delay 9.5 in order to do a 100% manual review
> of code, without adding any new automated tests or other non-manual
> tools for improving stability, then it's a waste of time; we might as
> well just release the beta, and our users will find more issues than we
> will.  I am concerned that if we declare a cleanup period, especially in
> the middle of the summer, all that will happen is that the project will
> go to sleep for an extra three months.

This is the exact same concern that I have.  A delay just to have a
delay is not useful.  I completely agree that we need more automated
testing, etc, though getting all of that set up and running could be
done at any time too- there's no reason to wait, nor do I believe
delaying 9.5 would make such automated testing appear.

	Thanks!

		Stephen

Commits

  1. Add Valgrind buffer access instrumentation.

  2. Fix wrong merge resolution making pg_receivexlog fail in 9.2.