Josh Berkus wrote:
> > As an example, how is patch information going to help us review HOT or
> > group-item-index? There is frankly more information about these in the
> > archives than someone could reasonable read. What someone needs is a
> > summary of where we are now on the patches, and lots of time.
> The idea is to provide ways for other people to help where they can and to
> provide better feedback to patch submitters so that they fix their own issues
> faster. Also, lesser PostgreSQL hackers than you could take on reviewing the
> "small" patches, leaving you to devote all of your attention to the "big"
> Actually, that can happen with the current system. The real blocker there is
> that some people, particularly Tom, work so fast that there's no chance for a
> new reviewer to tackle the easy stuff. Maybe the real solution is to
> encourage some of our other contributors to get their feet wet with easy
> patches so that they can help with the big ones later on?
> That is, if the problem is people and not tools, then what are we doing to
> train up the people we need?
We seem to handle trivial patches just fine. The current problem is
that the remaining patches require domain or subsystem-specific
knowledge to apply, e.g. XML or WAL, and those skills are available in a
limited number of people. If I had the expertise in those areas, I
would have applied the patches already.
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not