Simon Riggs wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:20 +0100, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 11:10 +0100, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
yeah and we keep finding major bugs nearly daily
Facts, please?
5 seconds of time spent on archives.postgresql.org show at least the
following SR/HS related bugs in the last 7 days or so:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2010-01/msg00400.php
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2010-01/msg00410.php
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2010-01/msg00396.php
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2010-01/msg00323.php
some of those you might call "minor" but they are bugs and given the
current rate we are seeing them is imho a clear sign of "code by far not
stable enough to consider new features that late in the cycle"
I don't think two very minor bugs in Hot Standby, reported and fixed 7
days apart is any indication of instability. It isn't the "daily bugs
reported" you suggested. Personally, I think it indicates quite the
opposite - if those are the only bugs I can find now, I'm ecstatic.
well we have not even made a realistic release (not even an alpha!) with
the current HS/SR code, we still have "must fix" issues on the table(for
both SR and HS) AND we find/fix more than a bug every two days in those
two features that are the cause for moving to 9.0.
If we want to release in anya realistic timeframe (and I recall you
advocating for doing that in the past) we really need to wrap up what we
have now, make it robust and see what we have left for all the further
releases.
I think your argument does apply to Streaming Rep, at this point. We
should consider releasing Alpha4 and then later going to Beta.
so you basically say that the current codebase(as a whole) is in need of
stabilisation and we need to make the cut off and release alpha4 now?
Not sure how that fits into proposing new features for other parts of
the system...
My point of view expressed here is not built in a few seconds, it is
built on discussion and feedback over 18 months. The conflict issue was
discussed by me with hackers at the May 2008 dev meeting. It should be
improved upon in this release and it has been the main issue concerning
the full range of people I have discussed HS with.
"in this release" refers to the current patch I guess - because there
was no HS in older versions of pg :)
Stefan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
