Remix.run Logo
▲ CharlesW 3 hours ago

> This year is going to be different. PostgreSQL 19 most likely won’t be released until November… […] So, what happened? The short answer is that LLMs happened. […] There’s a huge amount of code, and that code contains a huge number of bugs. […] What’s different now is that it’s become vastly easier to find those bugs.

This seems…good?

That it might disrupt the project's "traditional" release cadence a bit doesn't seem terribly bad in light of the alternative, which is shipping another major update with bugs which have apparently haunted the codebase for some time.

▲Gigachad an hour ago | parent | next [-]

At work we have put a full halt on feature work because the number of security related tasks has become staggering and urgent.

We will hopefully get over this wave and be able to move forward with much more secure software, but it's crazy right now.

▲ an hour ago | parent | next [-]
[deleted]
▲jimbokun an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Interesting that this could result in net negative software productivity world wide in terms of features right now.

LLMs finding unpatched vulnerabilities faster than they can be reasonably patched, bringing all other software development to a halt.

▲reissbaker 22 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

That's only if you consider security to be unproductive!

If you consider it to be productive work, it's a massive productivity boon happening right now. Of course, product managers might disagree...

▲OccamsMirror 4 minutes ago | parent [-]

How many of the security issues found were created by LLMs in the first place, though?

▲taberiand 33 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Hopefully with the amount of visibility LLMs are bringing to the situation, security will finally be considered a first-class feature

▲michaellee8 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

i think we have a pretty high p(doom) on frontier ai escaping containment with their weights and goes hack everything, if we do not act now we may have no chance to act anymore.

▲leoooodias 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Exactly. There's so much negativity, it sometimes borders Luddism.

"We found a bunch of ways to make our product safer and better. We need more time to ship a higher quality product."

PICKET SIGNS

▲alexpadula 14 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Luddism, did not expect to ever hear that word with Postgres development :>

▲throwaway27448 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

We could really use a lot more luddites tbh. Doesn't seem very applicable here tho.

▲giancarlostoro an hour ago | parent [-]

Dont worry, if OpenAI and Anthropic have their way and everyone loses their jobs to AI, we're all becoming luddites.

▲jimbokun an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Did you honestly need a /sarcasm tag in the article?

The article also concludes that overall, yes, finding more bugs is a good thing. Basically saying it’s the LLMs “fault” that the quality is improving, alongside a slight delay to the release.

▲noosphr an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They found a more efficient way to play Whac-A-Mole with bugs, they didn't find a way to reduce bugs.

▲UpsideDownRide 20 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Luddites were actually pretty reasonable when you dig into it. Maybe shouldn't be using it as an insult?

▲cornell532 13 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

For their own personal interests. Not for those of society

▲foxglacier 13 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

They're reasonable in a self-interested net-negative game-theory kind of way, yes. But that doesn't make it a good idea for society.

▲roosterIllusi0n 39 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This is good. This is how I would expect llms to affect a codebase. Nothing sucks more than having a coworker put out a code review but your codex immediately finds problems. Run llm/self reviews against your code before you have other humans review it. It is common courtesy.

▲27183 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes, exactly. The only question I have is whether the delay is attributable to high-quality bug reports or the burden of triaging low-quality ones. It's not completely clear which situation they're experiencing.

▲jeremyjh 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It’s pretty clear there are a lot of valid reports based on the large increase in backport commits cited.

▲jmspring 2 hours ago | parent [-]

The post sort of gave a read that the lower elements may be a culprit rather than triaging higher qualitu.

▲InsidiousWombat 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'd imagine just as every other project, both.

▲micromacrofoot 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

likely both

▲0c3ca83 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Certainly both. About half of AI bug reports I get are invalid. Many others are questionable. It's a huge time sink figuring it out.

https://www.vulncheck.com/blog/anthropic-glasswing-receipts

▲27183 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

That's kind of what I was afraid of. Both is really bad news. If you think of it in terms of average speed over ground, working on low quality reports is like spending a bunch of time at v=0.