Re: reducing the overhead of frequent table locks - now, with WIP patch

Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> wrote:
 
> Before you arrived, it was quite normal to suggest tuning patches
> after feature freeze.
 
I've worn a lot of hats in the practical end of this industry, and
regardless of which perspective I look at this from, I can't think
of anything so destructive to productivity, developer morale,
meeting deadlines or release quality as "slipping in just one more
item after feature freeze".  It's *always* something that someone
feels is so important that it's worth the delay and/or risk, and it
never works out well.
 
There are a lot of aspects of the development and release processes
on which I can see valid trade-offs and a lot of room for
negotiations and compromise, but having a feature freeze which is
treated seriously isn't one of them.  If nobody else was making an
issue of this, I still would be.
 
There's absolutely nothing personal or political in this -- I just
know what I've seen work and what I've seen cause problems.
 
-Kevin