Re: CF3+4 (was Re: Parallel query execution)

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: CF3+4 (was Re: Parallel query execution)
Date: 2013-01-23 17:19:08
Message-ID: 20130123171908.GB22758@momjian.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 02:04:14PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> >> IMHO that's the single most important task of a review.
>
> > Really? I'd say the most important task for a review is "does the patch
> > do what it says it does?". That is, if the patch is supposed to
> > implement feature X, does it actually? If it's a performance patch,
> > does performance actually improve?
>
> > If the patch doesn't implement what it's supposed to, who cares what the
> > code looks like?
>
> But even before that, you have to ask whether what it's supposed to do
> is something we want.

Yep. Our TODO list has a pretty short summary of this at the top:

Desirability -> Design -> Implement -> Test -> Review -> Commit

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Phil Sorber 2013-01-23 17:19:20 Re: [PATCH] pg_isready (was: [WIP] pg_ping utility)
Previous Message Andres Freund 2013-01-23 17:15:16 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve concurrency of foreign key locking