Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: > I guess you are saying that setting a cut-off was a bad idea, or that > the cut-off was too close to the final release date. For me, I think > there were three questions:
> 1. Were subtransactions acceptable, consensus no > 2. Could trapping errors work for PG 15, consensus no > 3. Could the feature be trimmed back for PG 15 to avoid these, consensus ? We could probably have accomplished #3 if there was more time, but we're out of time. (I'm not entirely convinced that spending effort towards #3 was productive anyway, given that we're now thinking about a much differently-scoped patch with API changes.) > I don't think our community works well when there are three issues in > play at once. To the extent that there was a management failure here, it was that we didn't press for a resolution sooner. Given the scale of the concerns raised in June, I kind of agree with Andres' opinion that fixing them post-freeze was doomed to failure. It was definitely doomed once we reached August with no real work done towards it. regards, tom lane