Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE25D63374C for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 13:51:31 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 87372-03 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 13:51:28 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from outmail128075.authsmtp.co.uk (outmail128075.authsmtp.co.uk [62.13.128.75]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D627C6334B2 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 13:51:27 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail-c187.authsmtp.com (mail-c187.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.33]) by punt4.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/Kp) with ESMTP id n4RGpHKe037487; Wed, 27 May 2009 17:51:17 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (85-211-225-42.dyn.gotadsl.co.uk [85.211.225.42]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/Kp) with ESMTP id n4RGpFkL003211; Wed, 27 May 2009 17:51:16 +0100 (BST) Subject: Re: New trigger option of pg_standby From: Simon Riggs To: Bruce Momjian Cc: Tom Lane , Heikki Linnakangas , Fujii Masao , Guillaume Smet , Peter Eisentraut , Kevin Grittner , pgsql-hackers In-Reply-To: <200905271608.n4RG8tW06393@momjian.us> References: <200905271608.n4RG8tW06393@momjian.us> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 17:54:36 +0100 Message-Id: <1243443276.24860.279.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Server-Quench: 987311e0-4ade-11de-8e8d-001185d377ca X-AuthRoute: OCdxZQATClZOTQEd DAteCiNZVAwpPBRK HVkIKg5MJUcNSQVJ NksafhtFagJbYFhI HGQLW11EUVp7XGJ/ agwfZQBDYEtPQQdo VVZNQE1QEQdtHhxP WBp8JVkELHlGeH1y ZEcsXHRbWApzfUF+ Q08BFXACNDM1dWEe BBVFf1ZcJB5Kfh5E YlUrV3QKMjRJBC9q VzwTFhsSEA9kHWxz Tx5FMUgTTkkGBHY7 XwwDGjNnGkNNXyoE NAAvLFIWDS41 X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633235383639.squirrel.dmpriest.net.uk:1562/Kp X-Report-SPAM: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-Virus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system. X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200905/1120 X-Sequence-Number: 138662 On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 12:08 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Simon Riggs wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 09:48 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > We are not going to improve unless we face our faults. > > > > True. Who or what is at fault, in your opinion? > > Well, we knew there was an issue but we didn't finalize our conclusions > and address it as best we could before beta; instead it languished and > was only addressed when we had our back up against the wall for beta2. > Obviously this is not the best aproach. Ideally someone would have > taken ownership of the issue, summarized the email conclusions, gotten a > patch together, and submitted it for application. I know patches were > posted but no one got group consensus on its usefulness until recently. My experience is that consensus/votes will be overruled by final committer, if they disagree, and so only a committer has the real authority to take the role you suggest. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/responsibility "The obligation to carry forward an assigned task to a successful conclusion. With responsibility goes authority to direct and take the necessary action to ensure success" From my side, Fujii-san's patch was adequate and backpatchable, though needed docs changes; I proposed it should be committed and said so clearly on open items wiki. My own suggestion was also an option, but it was also clearly not backpatchable and seemed unlikely to be acceptable at any time, let alone during beta. I am surprised at the final outcome, but at least there is one, which is good. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support