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
-
Add Valgrind buffer access instrumentation.
- 1e0dfd166b3f 14.0 landed
-
Fix wrong merge resolution making pg_receivexlog fail in 9.2.
- 6b700301c36e 9.2.11 cited