I reject the idea that all tools can be made simple enough for people to use them without understanding what they're doing.
Yes, of course we all want our tools to the best they can be, but that involves making tradeoffs in features because the maintainers don't have an infinite pool of time.
Postgres is a sufficiently advanced tool that if you're using it for any serious work you need to read the documentation for it. Ideally cover to cover, but at least skim the whole thing and pick out the important parts. The Postgres "Routine Database Maintenance Tasks" documentation [1] describes in great detail everything you need to do to keep your database working well.
I suppose, the attitude of the PG community. I can think of one other time when the PG community was very dismissive of criticism from users, even when it is valid...
Not to defend the community at large to a fault... But there are an amazing amount of bug reports which end up being nothing. Its easy to dismiss something as a non-issue by not understanding the underlying cause, which is why the NFS / fsync issue persisted for so long. To be fair, it was also an issue in other DBs.
Not that it forgives the fact the bug was reported 9 years ago and it just recently got fixed. I know personally I'd have messed it up.
Maybe you're a solo researcher doing data science.
I want my tools to be the best they can be. Always striving to be better. To push the limit and make things simply awesome.
I don't like defeatist attitudes or telling the user they are "holding it wrong".