Обсуждение: closing CommitFest 2016-03, feature freeze now in effect
CommitFest 2016-03 is now closed. I have moved "Twophase transactions on slave", "Partial sort", and "amcheck (B-Tree integrity checking tool)" to the next CommitFest in accordance with the policy previous set by the release management team. I have left "Replace buffer manager spinlock with atomic operations" active in the current CommitFest because it was granted an extension. The RMT has received Tom's request for an extension on the "Unique Joins" patch but has not yet reached a decision. Feature freeze is now in effect. Please, no more feature commits. Let's turn our attention to the task of working through the open items list. I think this is going to be a great release. Hopefully, we (by which I mean, in no small part, I) have not committed too many bugs along with all of the great features. Thanks, -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On 04/08/2016 05:05 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > CommitFest 2016-03 is now closed. I have moved "Twophase transactions > on slave", "Partial sort", and "amcheck (B-Tree integrity checking > tool)" to the next CommitFest in accordance with the policy previous > set by the release management team. I have left "Replace buffer > manager spinlock with atomic operations" active in the current > CommitFest because it was granted an extension. The RMT has received > Tom's request for an extension on the "Unique Joins" patch but has not > yet reached a decision. > > Feature freeze is now in effect. Please, no more feature commits. > Let's turn our attention to the task of working through the open items > list. > > I think this is going to be a great release. Hopefully, we (by which > I mean, in no small part, I) have not committed too many bugs along > with all of the great features. > > Thanks, > Can I just say, "Woot!, well done all!" Sincerely, JD -- Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/ +1-503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
> On 09 Apr 2016, at 03:05, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > > CommitFest 2016-03 is now closed. I have moved "Twophase transactions > on slave", "Partial sort", and "amcheck (B-Tree integrity checking > tool)" to the next CommitFest in accordance with the policy previous > set by the release management team. I have left "Replace buffer > manager spinlock with atomic operations" active in the current > CommitFest because it was granted an extension. The RMT has received > Tom's request for an extension on the "Unique Joins" patch but has not > yet reached a decision. > Aren’t "Twophase transactions on slave” falling into category of patches that fixes previously introduces behaviour? |'m not trying to argue with RMT decision, but just want to ensure that it was thoughtful decision, taking into account that absence of that patch in release can cause problems with replication in some cases as it was warned by Jesper[1] and Andres[2]. [1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5707A8CC.6080206@redhat.com [2] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/80856693-5065-4392-8606-CF572A2FF1FB@anarazel.de Stas Kelvich Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company
On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 6:57 AM, Stas Kelvich <s.kelvich@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > Aren’t "Twophase transactions on slave” falling into category of patches that fixes > previously introduces behaviour? |'m not trying to argue with RMT decision, but just > want to ensure that it was thoughtful decision, taking into account that absence of that > patch in release can cause problems with replication in some cases as it was warned > by Jesper[1] and Andres[2]. The RMT hasn't made a specific decision on this patch. I merely moved it in accordance with the general RMT decision about feature freeze: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+TgmoY56w5FOzeEo+i48qehL+BsVTwy-Q1M0xjUhUCwgGW7-Q@mail.gmail.com My personal view is as follows: If the patch sped up things on the master but not on the slave, that doesn't justify a post-freeze change to speed up the slave. That can be done for 9.7. On the other hand, if the patch broke things that are supposed to work, then that must be fixed. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On 9 April 2016 at 11:57, Stas Kelvich <s.kelvich@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
--
> On 09 Apr 2016, at 03:05, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> CommitFest 2016-03 is now closed. I have moved "Twophase transactions
> on slave", "Partial sort", and "amcheck (B-Tree integrity checking
> tool)" to the next CommitFest in accordance with the policy previous
> set by the release management team. I have left "Replace buffer
> manager spinlock with atomic operations" active in the current
> CommitFest because it was granted an extension. The RMT has received
> Tom's request for an extension on the "Unique Joins" patch but has not
> yet reached a decision.
>
Aren’t "Twophase transactions on slave” falling into category of patches that fixes
previously introduces behaviour? |'m not trying to argue with RMT decision, but just
want to ensure that it was thoughtful decision, taking into account that absence of that
patch in release can cause problems with replication in some cases as it was warned
by Jesper[1] and Andres[2].
[1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5707A8CC.6080206@redhat.com
[2] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/80856693-5065-4392-8606-CF572A2FF1FB@anarazel.de
It's a longstanding problem and it would be good if we had an improvement.
I can't commit a patch that has a reported bug against it, nor can we fix the problem if we can't reproduce it.
If we do get a committable patch, that is then the time to make a case to RMT, but not before.
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services