Re: Closing out the June commitfest

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Closing out the June commitfest
Date: 2012-07-16 01:22:28
Message-ID: 26988.1342401748@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> Which three patches didn't get any review?

> Or to be more specific: I'm in favor of closing out everything which has
> had some review. I think the three patches without any review should be
> dealt with case-by-case.

Well, I might be wrong, but the ones that don't show any activity in the
CF app are

tuplesort memory usage: grow_memtuples
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=818

Trim trailing NULL columns
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=840

Restrict ALTER FUNCTION CALLED ON NULL INPUT
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=854

(Note: some of the individual patches in the "logical replication" herd
haven't been given individual reviews, but certainly that patchset as a
whole has gotten its fair share of time and more.)

None of the three above seem to me to be blocking further work,
so I don't have a hard time with punting them to September.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2012-07-16 01:22:36 Re: pgbench--new transaction type
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-07-16 01:11:39 Re: [patch] libpq one-row-at-a-time API