On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 10:19 PM Tomas Vondra <tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 01:11:40PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > >Hi, > > > >On 2019-03-28 21:09:22 +0100, Michael Banck wrote: > >> I agree that the current patch might have some corner-cases where it > >> does not guarantee 100% accuracy in online mode, but I hope the current > >> version at least has no more false negatives. > > > >False positives are *bad*. We shouldn't integrate code that has them. > > > > Yeah, I agree. I'm a bit puzzled by the reluctance to make the online mode > communicate with the server, which would presumably address these issues. > Can someone explain why not to do that? > I agree that this effort seems better spent on fixing those issues there (of which many are the same), and then re-use that. FWIW I've initially argued against that, believing that we can address > those issues in some other way, and I'd love if that was possible. But > considering we're still trying to make that work reliably I think the > reasonable conclusion is that Andres was right communicating with the > server is necessary. > > Of course, I definitely appreciate people are working on this, otherwise > we wouldn't be having this discussion ... > +1. -- Magnus Hagander Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/> Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>
