Re: Postgres 9.6 scariest patch tournament

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 04:06:55PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@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 <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778  AIM: dfetter666  Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter      XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate