Re: [DOCS] Re: [HACKERS] Uniform policy for author credits in contrib module documentation?

2007-12-09 Thread Robert Treat
On Thursday 06 December 2007 03:54, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 10:46:51PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > >As of CVS HEAD, some of the contrib module documentation pages have
> > >extensive credit screeds, eg
> > >http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/cube.html
> > >and some just have the author's name, with or without an  link,
> > >and some don't have anything at all.
> > >
> > >I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other, except that I think
> > >we should have a uniform policy for all the contrib modules.
> >
> > Well once we push directly into the core documentation I agree that
> > outside of release notes (although you just brought that up in another
> > thread) we don't need to be mentioning contributions like that. Those
> > who have contributed are in the logs.
> >
> > Further those who have provided reasonable contribution really should be
> > mentioned on the contributors page that is up for discussion which would
> > make the rest of this moot yes?
>
> +1, since they are listed in the release notes when the contrib modules are
> added - just like any other piece of code. IMO no reason to treat contrib
> differently from any other code in this case.
>

Hmm, I have often seen that the person listed in the contrib docs was 
considered the person to contact if you had questions/comments/patches/etc... 
about a specific contrib module.  I wonder if people would still get the same 
level of help if those names are removed and they have to go to the regular 
mailing lists for help (which contrib authors may not follow). 

-- 
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
   subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
   message can get through to the mailing list cleanly


Re: [HACKERS] [DOCS] "distributed checkpoint"

2007-12-09 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Greg Smith wrote:

> It's good this came up, because that is factually wrong; while the average 
> case is much better some OS-dependant aspects of the spike (what happens at 
> fsync) are certainly still there.  I think it's easier to rewrite this 
> whole thing so it's technically accurate rather than a simple fix of the 
> wording, something like this:
>
> "Checkpoint writes can be spread over a longer time period to smooth the 
> I/O spike during each checkpoint"

Thanks, I changed it to this.

-- 
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.advogato.org/person/alvherre
"No necesitamos banderas
 No reconocemos fronteras"  (Jorge González)

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings