Re: Re: synchronous_commit and synchronous_replication Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Efficient transaction-controlled synchronous replication.

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndquadrant.fr> wrote:
>> Maybe it's just me, but I'm struggling to understand current
>> community processes and decisions.
> Well, I've already spent a fair amount of time trying to explain
> my understanding of it, and for my trouble I got accused of being
> long-winded.  Which is probably true, but makes me think I should
> probably keep this response short.  I'm not unwilling to talk
> about it, though, and perhaps someone else would like to chime in.
I rather liked the brief comment in a recent post of yours where you
said that at this point we should only be accepting patches which
stabilize what has already been committed, rather than new features
which might require further stabilization.  I don't know whether the
patch under discussion satisfies that test, but that should be the
main consideration at this point in the release cycle, in my view.
Of course, with anything this complex there will be gray areas where
people could have honest disagreement.
-Kevin