Message-ID: <556F148C.80903@commandprompt.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2015 07:51:56 -0700
From: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
CC: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>,
 Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>,
 "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
 pgsql-core <pgsql-core@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Restore-reliability mode
References: <28477.1432931820@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+Tgmoa6hekDGenr29TG_K4bH7rxLEM9RU+5KDAiY+SiAsFhew@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150529223321.GB6535@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <CA+TgmoYSO0a9YDe2bhpZoPgO4m62CyQL26LRkCQ8=vrQ8ZwdXA@mail.gmail.com>
 <12510.1432958887@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+TgmoYovkev0xXnxaTD8vnt=M9Cn+RmOkVEouqwj6_9JLkzLw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150530154559.GA25053@momjian.us>
 <20150530204727.GJ13944@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <20150531024845.GB13697@momjian.us>
 <20150603135049.GA74753@tornado.leadboat.com>
 <20150603141837.GD18006@awork2.anarazel.de>
In-Reply-To: <20150603141837.GD18006@awork2.anarazel.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

On 06/03/2015 07:18 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> On 2015-06-03 09:50:49 -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
>> Second, I would define the subject matter as "bug fixes, testing and
>> review", not "restructuring, testing and review."  Different code
>> structures are clearest to different hackers.  Restructuring, on
>> average, adds bugs even more quickly than feature development adds
>> them.
>
> I can't agree with this. While I agree with not doing large
> restructuring for 9.5, I think we can't affort not to refactor for
> clarity, even if that introduces bugs. Noticeable parts of our code have
> to frequently be modified for new features and are badly structured at
> the same time. While restructuring will may temporarily increase the
> number of bugs in the short term, it'll decrease the number of bugs long
> term while increasing the number of potential contributors and new
> features.  That's obviously not to say we should just refactor for the
> sake of it.
>

Our project has been continuing to increase momentum over the last few 
years and our adoption has increased at an amazing rate. It is important 
to remember that we have users. These users have needs that must be met 
else those users will move on to a different technology.

I agree that we need to postpone this release. I also agree that there 
is likely re-factoring to be done. I have also never met a programmer 
who doesn't think something needs to be re-factored. The majority of 
programmers I know all suffer from NIH and want to change how things are 
implemented.

If we are going to re-factor, it should not be considered global and 
should be attacked with specific goals in mind. If those goals are not 
specifically defined and agreed on, we will get very pretty code with 
very little use for our users. Then our users will leave because they 
are busy waiting on us to re-factor.

In short, we must balance this effort with the needs of the code versus 
the needs of our users.

Sincerely,

JD

-- 
The most kicking donkey PostgreSQL Infrastructure company in existence.
The oldest, the most experienced, the consulting company to the stars.
Command Prompt, Inc. http://www.commandprompt.com/ +1 -503-667-4564 -
24x7 - 365 - Proactive and Managed Professional Services!


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers