Message-ID: <55701A16.9040009@iki.fi>
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2015 12:27:50 +0300
From: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
Reply-To: hlinnaka@iki.fi
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
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: [CORE] postpone next week's release
References: 
 <CA+Tgmoadg9dHLpWodfwDaTZ=RbW+C_4CrgYyZ=Vx5QpMyP=N5A@mail.gmail.com>
 <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> <557011A0.6070604@iki.fi>
 <28642_1433409468_557017BC_28642_54_1_20150604091742.GI18006@awork2.anarazel.de>
In-Reply-To: 
 <28642_1433409468_557017BC_28642_54_1_20150604091742.GI18006@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 06/04/2015 12:17 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2015-06-04 11:51:44 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> So, I'm all for refactoring and adding abstractions where it makes sense,
>> but it's not going to solve design problems.
>
> I personally don't really see the multixact changes being that bad on
> the overall design. It pretty much just extended an earlier design. Now
> that wasn't great, but I don't think too many people had realized that
> at that point.  The biggest problem was underestimating the complexity.

Yeah, many of the issues were pre-existing, and would've been good to 
fix anyway.

The multixact issues remind me of the another similar thing we did: the 
visibility map. It too was non-critical when it was first introduced, 
but later we started using it for index-only-scans, and it suddenly 
became important that it's up-to-date and crash-safe. We did uncover 
some bugs in that area when index-only-scans were introduced, similar to 
the multixact bugs, only not as bad because it didn't lead to data loss. 
I don't have any point to make with that comparison, but it was similar 
in many ways.

- Heikki


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