On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 04:06:55PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > Peter Geoghegan wrote: > >> I would have appreciated more scope to say how confident I am in > >> my prediction, and how scary in absolute terms I consider the > >> scariest patches to be. > > > It was purposefully ambiguous. Maybe it should have been stated > > explicitely. > > I was thinking about complaining that "scariest" and "most bugs" are > not the same thing. Features you can turn off are not very scary, > even if they're full of bugs (cough ... parallel query ... cough), > because we could just ship 'em disabled by default until there's > more reason to trust them. What I find scary is patches that can > break existing use-cases with no simple workaround. I'm not sure > which one to vote for yet.
There's space on the ballot for up to three, and it appears to be a ranked choice or similar preference system. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers