Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Anyway, is there anyone who thinks the "cycle the queue every 6 weeks or 2 
> > months or suitable short period" is a *bad* idea?   It might be hard to 
> > pull 
> > off, but we won't know until we try.
> It seems worth a try --- we can certainly abandon it easily if it
> doesn't work.
> Personally I feel every six weeks would be too short: we'd be talking
> only a month of work between commit-fests.  I like a two-month cycle
> partly because it wouldn't rotate relative to the calendar: we'd always
> know that the first half of every odd-numbered month, or something like
> that, is commit-fest time.

Sounds fine to me.  Basically it is a "reviewers, get your heads out of
your monitors and help other patch submitters".  Not a lot of additional
fun for reviewers, of course, but probably necessary.

  Bruce Momjian  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

  + 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

Reply via email to