From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr> |
Subject: | Re: Is it time for triage on the open patches? |
Date: | 2012-03-09 20:08:07 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaTkrO-Mpq7x=zeq_MBMeCTTQe9Nt=R3B=Ec2pokOFbDA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> This is a fair position, but I think it's a bit unfair to be applying
> such pressure to just the command-triggers patch and not all the other
> open issues. Hence, $SUBJECT: is it time to start forcing this
> commitfest to a conclusion, and if so what kind of schedule are we
> trying to set?
Just to be clear, it wasn't my intention to hold command triggers
specifically to a different standard - but I do differentiate between
small patches and big patches. Small patches that someone can get
committed with an hour's worth of review can be treated a little more
leniently than large patches that may take many cycles of review
adding up to days of effort, and I believe command triggers to be one
such patch.
> Personally, the open patches that I'm excited about getting into the
> tree (or at least trying hard to) are:
> * NULLs support in SP-GiST
> * Caching constant stable expressions per execution
> and not that much else. (I'm also interested in the pgsql_fdw patch
> but I'm afraid that getting it to committable shape in the next week
> or two may be unrealistic.) Probably other people have their own,
> different shortlists.
I'd like to get the two sepgsql patches done if possible. I'm going
to commit the rest of the DROP patch shortly, and the GUC for client
label I will review and commit if it seems like it's in good shape. I
would *like* to see Heikki's XLogInsert scaling patch committed, but
it seems like it's still too buggy for that, and I'm not sure how long
we should wait for it to get fixed; I also don't have plans to work on
it personally. It's hard to pick favorites among the rest; there are
a number of things I'd like to work on, but if it's just me working on
them it's going to take longer than I want to wait for them to get
done. There's been very little patch review going on, with a couple
of notable exceptions like Thom and Noah, and not a lot of new patch
versions from patch authors either, again with a few exceptions, like
Dimitri. So it's not terribly surprising that progress is very slow.
I'm not sure what to do about that, either: it doesn't seem very fair
to start booting patches things that are in relatively good shape, but
on the other hand I'm not willing to single-handedly (or even with
both hands) take on the task of reviewing everything that nobody else
is paying attention to.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Yeb Havinga | 2012-03-09 20:09:43 | Re: [v9.2] Add GUC sepgsql.client_label |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-03-09 20:04:23 | Re: xlog location arithmetic |