On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 at 16:26, Robert Haas wrote:
> And maybe we need to think of a way to further mitigate this crush of
> last minute commits. e.g. In the last week, you can't have more
> feature commits, or more lines of insertions in your commits, than you
> did in the prior 3 weeks combined.
On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 5:16 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Committing code is a hard job, no question. However, committers have to
> give up the idea that they should wait for brilliant ideas before
> finalizing patches. If you come up with a better idea later, great, but
> don't wait to finalize
On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 10:41:17AM -0400, Robert Treat wrote:
> Unfortunately many humans are hardwired towards procrastination and
> last minute heroics (it's one reason why deadline driven development
> works even though in the long run it tends to be bad practice), and
> historically was one of
On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 09:32:14PM +0200, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
> I'll sketch a situation: There's a big patch that some non-committer
> submitted that has been sitting on the mailinglist for 6 months or
> more, only being reviewed by other non-committers, which the submitter
> quickly
On 2024-04-08 Mo 19:26, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
I quite like the triage idea. But I think there's also a case for being
more a bit more flexible with those patches we don't throw out. A case
close to my heart: I'd have been very sad if the NESTED piece of
JSON_TABLE hadn't
On 4/9/24 11:25, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 at 20:15, Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 4/8/24 17:48, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
>>> On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 at 17:21, Tomas Vondra
>>> wrote:
Maybe it'd be better to start by expanding the existing rule about not
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 at 20:15, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
>
> On 4/8/24 17:48, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
>> On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 at 17:21, Tomas Vondra
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Maybe it'd be better to start by expanding the existing rule about not
>>> committing patches introduced for the first time in the
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> I quite like the triage idea. But I think there's also a case for being
> more a bit more flexible with those patches we don't throw out. A case
> close to my heart: I'd have been very sad if the NESTED piece of
> JSON_TABLE hadn't made the cut, which it did with a few
On 2024-04-08 Mo 12:07, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
On 2024-Apr-08, Robert Haas wrote:
And maybe we need to think of a way to further mitigate this crush of
last minute commits. e.g. In the last week, you can't have more
feature commits, or more lines of insertions in your commits, than you
did in
On 4/8/24 21:32, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 at 20:15, Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>> I 100% understand how frustrating the lack of progress can be, and I
>> agree we need to do better. I tried to move a number of stuck patches
>> this CF, and I hope (and plan) to do more of this
On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 3:32 PM Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
> Maybe a better solution to this problem would be to spread impactful
> reviews by committers more evenly throughout the year. Then there
> wouldn't be such a rush to address them in the last commit fest.
Spreading activity of all sorts
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 at 20:15, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> I 100% understand how frustrating the lack of progress can be, and I
> agree we need to do better. I tried to move a number of stuck patches
> this CF, and I hope (and plan) to do more of this in the future.
>
> But I don't quite see how would
Hi,
On 4/8/24 14:15, Tomas Vondra wrote:
I think we need to
fix & improve that - not to rework/push it at the very end.
This is going to be very extreme...
Either a patch is ready for merge or it isn't - when 2 or more
Committers agree on it then it can be merged - the policy have to be
On 4/8/24 17:48, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 at 17:21, Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>> For me the main problem with the pre-freeze crush is that it leaves
>> pretty much no practical chance to do meaningful review/testing, and
>> some of the patches likely went
On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 12:30 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2024-04-08 09:26:09 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 7, 2024 at 6:50 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> > And maybe we need to think of a way to further mitigate this crush of
> > last minute commits. e.g. In the last week,
On 2024-Apr-08, Robert Haas wrote:
> And maybe we need to think of a way to further mitigate this crush of
> last minute commits. e.g. In the last week, you can't have more
> feature commits, or more lines of insertions in your commits, than you
> did in the prior 3 weeks combined. I don't know.
On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 11:48 AM Matthias van de Meent
wrote:
> I also think there is already a big issue with a lack of interest in
> getting existing patches from non-committers committed, reducing the
> set of patches that could be considered is just cheating the numbers
> and discouraging
On 4/8/24 8:29 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2024-04-08 09:26:09 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sun, Apr 7, 2024 at 6:50 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
And maybe we need to think of a way to further mitigate this crush of
last minute commits. e.g. In the last week, you can't have more
feature
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 at 19:48, Matthias van de Meent <
boekewurm+postg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 at 17:21, Tomas Vondra
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 4/8/24 16:59, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> > >> On 08/04/2024 16:43, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >>> I was just about
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 at 17:21, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4/8/24 16:59, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> >> On 08/04/2024 16:43, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> I was just about to pen an angry screed along the same lines.
> >>> The commit flux over the past couple days, and even the
Hi,
On 2024-04-08 09:26:09 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 7, 2024 at 6:50 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> And maybe we need to think of a way to further mitigate this crush of
> last minute commits. e.g. In the last week, you can't have more
> feature commits, or more lines of insertions in
On 4/8/24 11:05, Tom Lane wrote:
Pavel Borisov writes:
IMO the fact that people struggle to work on patches, and make them better,
etc. is an immense blessing for the Postgres community. Is the peak of
commits really a big problem provided we have 6 months before actual
release? I doubt March
On 4/8/24 16:59, Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas writes:
>> On 08/04/2024 16:43, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I was just about to pen an angry screed along the same lines.
>>> The commit flux over the past couple days, and even the last
>>> twelve hours, was flat-out ridiculous. These patches
Pavel Borisov writes:
> IMO the fact that people struggle to work on patches, and make them better,
> etc. is an immense blessing for the Postgres community. Is the peak of
> commits really a big problem provided we have 6 months before actual
> release? I doubt March patches tend to be worse
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> On 08/04/2024 16:43, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I was just about to pen an angry screed along the same lines.
>> The commit flux over the past couple days, and even the last
>> twelve hours, was flat-out ridiculous. These patches weren't
>> ready a week ago, and I doubt they
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 at 18:42, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 08/04/2024 16:43, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Robert Haas writes:
> >> And maybe we need to think of a way to further mitigate this crush of
> >> last minute commits. e.g. In the last week, you can't have more
> >> feature commits, or more
On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 10:41 AM Robert Treat wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 10:27 AM Melanie Plageman
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 9:26 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> > > On Sun, Apr 7, 2024 at 6:50 PM Michael Paquier
> > > wrote:
> > > > And, as of the moment of typing this email, I get:
On 08/04/2024 16:43, Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Haas writes:
And maybe we need to think of a way to further mitigate this crush of
last minute commits. e.g. In the last week, you can't have more
feature commits, or more lines of insertions in your commits, than you
did in the prior 3 weeks
> On 8 Apr 2024, at 17:26, Melanie Plageman wrote:
>
> What if we pick the actual feature freeze time randomly? That is,
> starting on March 15th (or whenever but more than a week before), each
> night someone from RMT generates a random number between $current_day
> and April 8th. If the
On Mon, 2024-04-08 at 09:26 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> And maybe we need to think of a way to further mitigate this crush of
> last minute commits. e.g. In the last week, you can't have more
> feature commits, or more lines of insertions in your commits, than you
> did in the prior 3 weeks
On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 10:27 AM Melanie Plageman
wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 9:26 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 7, 2024 at 6:50 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > And, as of the moment of typing this email, I get:
> > > =# select '2024-04-08 00:00-12:00' - now() as time_remaining;
> >
On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 9:26 AM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 7, 2024 at 6:50 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> > And, as of the moment of typing this email, I get:
> > =# select '2024-04-08 00:00-12:00' - now() as time_remaining;
> > time_remaining
> > -
> > 13:10:35.688134
> >
Robert Haas writes:
> And maybe we need to think of a way to further mitigate this crush of
> last minute commits. e.g. In the last week, you can't have more
> feature commits, or more lines of insertions in your commits, than you
> did in the prior 3 weeks combined. I don't know. I think this
On Sun, Apr 7, 2024 at 6:50 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> And, as of the moment of typing this email, I get:
> =# select '2024-04-08 00:00-12:00' - now() as time_remaining;
> time_remaining
> -
> 13:10:35.688134
> (1 row)
>
> So there is just a bit more than half a day remaining
On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 03:10:27PM +1300, David Rowley wrote:
> Someone asked me about this, so thought it might be useful to post here.
I've received the same question.
> To express this as UTC, It's:
>
> postgres=# select '2024-04-08 00:00-12:00' at time zone 'UTC';
> timezone
>
On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 at 15:50, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Additionally, the RMT has set the feature freeze to be **April 8, 2024
> at 0:00 AoE** (see [1]). This is the last time to commit features for
> PostgreSQL 17. In other words, no new PostgreSQL 17 feature can be
> committed after April 8,
On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 12:39 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> > If you think that this is OK, and as far as I can see this looks OK on
> > the thread, then this open item should be moved under "resolved before
> > 17beta1", mentioning the commit involved in the fix. Please see [1]
> > for
Dear Michael,
> If you think that this is OK, and as far as I can see this looks OK on
> the thread, then this open item should be moved under "resolved before
> 17beta1", mentioning the commit involved in the fix. Please see [1]
> for examples.
OK, I understood that I could wait checking from
On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 03:49:24AM +, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) wrote:
> I think the entry can be closed:
>
> ```
> pg_upgrade with --link mode failing upgrade of publishers
> Commit: 29d0a77fa660
> Owner: Amit Kapila
> ```
>
> The reported failure was only related with the test script, not
Dear Michael,
> We are pleased to announce the Release Management Team (RMT) (cc'd)
> for the PostgreSQL 17 release:
> - Robert Haas
> - Heikki Linnakangas
> - Michael Paquier
Thanks for managing the release of PostgreSQL to proceed the right direction!
> You can track open items for the
Hi,
We are pleased to announce the Release Management Team (RMT) (cc'd)
for the PostgreSQL 17 release:
- Robert Haas
- Heikki Linnakangas
- Michael Paquier
You can find information about the responsibilities of the RMT here:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Release_Management_Team
Additionally,
41 matches
Mail list logo
