On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: >> > contentious issue, a few days after the initial post. Hm. Not sure how >> > you'd react if you weren't the author. >> >> Probably not very well. Do you want me to revert it? > > No. I want(ed) to express that I am not comfortable with how this got > in. My aim wasn't to generate a flurry of responses with everybody > piling on, or anything like that. But it's unfortunately hard to > avoid. I wish I knew a way, besides only sending private mails. Which I > don't think is a great approach either. > > I do agree that we need something to tackle this problem, and that this > quite possibly is the least bad way to do this. And certainly the only > one that's been implemented and posted with any degree of completeness. > > But even given the last paragraph, posting a complex new patch in a > somewhat related thread, and then pushing it 5 days later is pretty darn > quick.
Sorry. I understand your discomfort, and you're probably right. I'll try to handle it better next time. I think my frustration with the process got the better of me a little bit here. This patch may very well not be perfect, but it's sure as heck better than doing nothing, and if I'd gone out of my way to say "hey, everybody, here's a patch that you might want to object to" I'm sure I could have found some volunteers to do just that. But, you know, that's not really what I want. What I want is somebody to do a detailed review and help me fix whatever the problems the patch may have. And ideally, I'd like that person to understand that you can't have parallel query without doing something in this area - which I think you do, but certainly not everybody probably did - and that a lot of simplistic, non-invasive ideas for how to handle this are going to be utterly inadequate in complex cases. Unless you or Noah want to take a hand, I don't expect to get that sort of review. Now, that having been said, I think your frustration with the way I handled it is somewhat justified, and since you are not arguing for a revert I'm not sure what I can do except try not to let my frustration get in the way next time. Which I will try to do. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers