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

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Joshua Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
> As long as we have solidarity of the committers that this is not allowed, however, this is not a real problem.  And it appears that we do.  In the future, it shouldn't even be necessary to discuss it.

Solidarity?

Simon - who was a committer last time I checked - seems to think that
the current process is entirely bunko.  And that is resulting in the
waste of a lot of time that could be better spent.  Our ability to
sustain this development process rests on the idea that we have some
kind of shared idea of what is and is not acceptable in general and at
particular points in the release cycle.  It *shouldn't* be necessary
to discuss it, but it apparently is.  Over and over and over again, in
fact.  It is critically important for the future success of this
project that we learn to walk and chew gum at the same time.  We are
failing outright.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company