On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 04:59:51PM -0400, Chris Browne wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) writes:
> > Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> I'd suggest we have multiple checkpoints during the cycle.
> >> Checkpoint is a "patch queue blitz" where we stop developing and
> >> reduce the queue to nothing. Perhaps a two-week period where
> >> everybody helps reduce the queue, not just Tom and Bruce. Every
> >> outstanding patch gets told what they need to do in order to get
> >> it committed. FF is then just the last in a series of
> >> checkpoints. Suggest we do a checkpoint every 2 months.
> >
> > I like this idea ...
> Don't we need to have a background writer process to gradually flush
> this data so that checkpoints aren't so massive?  ;-)

I'm proposing a DSCM with easy branching and merging to implement this
background writer process :)

The one below is already available, so we don't have to do a "flag
day" with it.


There are git-cvsimport and git-cvsexport utilities which make
communication between the legacy SCM and the DSCM straight-forward.

David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778  AIM: dfetter666  Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter      XMPP: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at


Reply via email to