Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Z0u8k-0007En-3r for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 05 Jun 2015 16:06:38 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Z0u8j-0002a6-FQ for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 05 Jun 2015 16:06:37 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Z0u8i-0002Zt-5u; Fri, 05 Jun 2015 16:06:36 +0000 Received: from mail-by2on0098.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([207.46.100.98] helo=na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1Z0u8R-0004IS-8q; Fri, 05 Jun 2015 16:06:26 +0000 Authentication-Results: postgresql.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none; Received: from decina.attlocal.net (2602:306:ce8b:3460:65f0:b806:f32d:feba) by CY1PR11MB0684.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (25.163.236.22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.172.22; Fri, 5 Jun 2015 16:06:15 +0000 Message-ID: <5571C8F4.6030105@BlueTreble.com> Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2015 11:06:12 -0500 From: Jim Nasby User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Lane , Robert Haas CC: Simon Riggs , Josh Berkus , Noah Misch , Bruce Momjian , Andres Freund , Stephen Frost , Magnus Hagander , "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" , pgsql-core Subject: Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode References: <28477.1432931820@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20150529223321.GB6535@alap3.anarazel.de> <12510.1432958887@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20150530154559.GA25053@momjian.us> <20150530204727.GJ13944@alap3.anarazel.de> <20150531024845.GB13697@momjian.us> <20150603135049.GA74753@tornado.leadboat.com> <556F3798.6010707@agliodbs.com> <26673.1433514236@sss.pgh.pa.us> <28291.1433518778@sss.pgh.pa.us> In-Reply-To: <28291.1433518778@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [2602:306:ce8b:3460:65f0:b806:f32d:feba] X-ClientProxiedBy: BLUPR07CA092.namprd07.prod.outlook.com (25.160.24.47) To CY1PR11MB0684.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (25.163.236.22) X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:CY1PR11MB0684; X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(520003)(5005006)(3002001); SRVR:CY1PR11MB0684; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CY1PR11MB0684; X-Forefront-PRVS: 05986C03E0 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(479174004)(377454003)(24454002)(23746002)(93886004)(42186005)(83506001)(53416004)(189998001)(5001960100002)(46102003)(86362001)(122386002)(40100003)(92566002)(2950100001)(36756003)(15975445007)(47776003)(54356999)(65816999)(5001770100001)(19580395003)(59896002)(33656002)(87976001)(76176999)(87266999)(4001350100001)(50986999)(62966003)(77156002)(50466002)(65956001)(3826002)(85282002)(336755003)(18886065003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:CY1PR11MB0684; H:decina.attlocal.net; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en; X-OriginatorOrg: bluetreble.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jun 2015 16:06:15.4439 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY1PR11MB0684 X-Pg-Spam-Score: -3.0 (---) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org On 6/5/15 10:39 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > The other side of that coin is that we might get useful comments from > testers on how the feature ought to work. I don't agree with the notion > that all feature details must be graven on stone tablets before we start > trying to get feedback from people outside the core development community. +1 > The same point applies to the FDW C API questions, or to RLS, or to the > "expanded objects" work that I did. (I'd really love it if the PostGIS > folk would try to use that sometime before it's too late to adjust the > definition...) Now, you could argue that people likely to have useful > input on those issues are fully capable of working with git tip, and you'd > probably be right, but would they do so? As Simon says nearby, publishing > an alpha/beta/whatever is our signal to the wider community that it's time > for them to start paying attention. I do not think they will look at 9.5 > until we do that; and I think it'll be our loss if they don't start > looking at these things soon. +1, but I also think we should have a better mechanism for soliciting user input on these things while design discussions are happening. ISTM that there's a lot of hand-waving that happens around use cases that could probably be clarified with end user input. FWIW, I don't think the blocker here is git or building from source. If someone has that amount of time to invest it's not much different than grabbing a tarball. -- Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers