On 2016/02/09 6:46, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 10:19 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>
>> Hi everybody,
>>
>> I just closed the last few remaining items in the commitfest. This is
>> the final summary:
>>
>> Committed: 32.
>> Moved to next CF: 32.
>> Rejected: 2.
>> Returned
On 2/8/16 4:19 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> I'm closing this commitfest now. We even have three weeks before the
> next one starts, so everybody can take a break for once! Yay!
Many thanks, Álvaro!
By the way, I would be happy to manage the next commitfest. I've been
watching the process for
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> I'm closing this commitfest now. We even have three weeks before the
> next one starts, so everybody can take a break for once! Yay!
Yay! And thanks for running this one --- I know it's a mighty
tedious and thankless task.
regards, tom lane
-
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 10:19 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I just closed the last few remaining items in the commitfest. This is
> the final summary:
>
> Committed: 32.
> Moved to next CF: 32.
> Rejected: 2.
> Returned with Feedback: 33.
> Total: 99.
>
> I think we did a fair
Hi everybody,
I just closed the last few remaining items in the commitfest. This is
the final summary:
Committed: 32.
Moved to next CF: 32.
Rejected: 2.
Returned with Feedback: 33.
Total: 99.
I think we did a fairly decent job this time around: we only passed a
third of the patches to the
Hello Andres,
I'm working on/off on the checkpointer flushing thing, so I don't think
it makes sense for somebody else to take that over at this point.
Yep.
I still wish you could share your current working version? The last
version sent is from November 11th, and I think someone said that
On 2016-02-03 12:32:47 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki and/or Andres have their names on three of the remaining RFC
> patches; it's unlikely any other committer will touch those patches
> unless they take their names off.
If you want to take over the timestamp patch, please feel free to do
so. Oth
On 2016/02/04 12:04, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 10:00 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
Thank you.
+1.
Thank you!
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpr
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 10:00 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> Thank you.
+1.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org
On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 06:18:02PM +0100, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I just closed a large number of patches in the 2006-01 commitfest as
> "returned with feedback". The vast majority of those were in "waiting
> on author"; I verified that the threads had posted something to the
> author and the auth
Dne 3. 2. 2016 20:51 napsal uživatel "Daniel Verite" <
dan...@manitou-mail.org>:
>
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> > https://commitfest.postgresql.org/8/372/
> > \crosstabview (previously: \rotate) in psql for crosstab-style
display
>
> About this one, the code is no longer moving, the lat
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/8/372/
> \crosstabview (previously: \rotate) in psql for crosstab-style display
About this one, the code is no longer moving, the latest addition was
regression tests a couple days ago.
I think it should be moved to the next
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> A number of patches still remain in the current commitfest. 11 of them
> are marked as "ready for committer" so supposedly some committer should
> grab them and push them.
The "SET ROLE hook" patch should be moved to RWF state; it's not going
to be committed in anything
Hi,
Status summary:
Needs review: 7.
Ready for Committer: 11.
Committed: 28.
Moved to next CF: 23.
Rejected: 2.
Returned with Feedback: 28.
Total: 99.
I just closed a large number of patches in the 2006-01 commitfest as
"returned with feedback". The vast majority of those were in "waiting
Hello Andres,
FWIW, I've been working and benchmarking this a lot over the last weeks.
I'm running a lot of tests as weel, on HDDs. It is basically always better
with the patch, although sometimes not sorting but flushing is better than
both, which suggest that the gucs should be kept just
Robert Haas writes:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 11:36 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>> Four "Moved to next commitfest"
>> * https://commitfest.postgresql.org/8/129/
>> Unique Joins
> I've been hoping Tom would pick this up. If he doesn't, I will look
> at it eventually, but it's not on my top 20 li
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 11:36 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> We still have 41 patches that haven't gotten enough review though. The
> bad part about it is that there's a number of patches that have been
> bouncing for many commitfests now. Here's a list of the patches with
> the most such actions (
On 2016-01-25 15:02:02 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2016-01-25 13:36:04 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > * https://commitfest.postgresql.org/8/260/
> > > checkpoint continuous flushing
> >
> > FWIW, I've been working and benchmarking this a lot over the last
> > w
Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2016-01-25 13:36:04 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > We still have 41 patches that haven't gotten enough review though. The
> > bad part about it is that there's a number of patches that have been
> > bouncing for many commitfests now. Here's a list of the patches with
>
On 2016-01-25 13:36:04 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> We still have 41 patches that haven't gotten enough review though. The
> bad part about it is that there's a number of patches that have been
> bouncing for many commitfests now. Here's a list of the patches with
> the most such actions (both
Into its third week, this commitfest is looking like this:
Needs review: 41.
Waiting on Author: 24.
Ready for Committer: 10.
Committed: 23.
Rejected: 1.
Total: 99.
The number of committed patches continues to grow slowly but steadily,
which is a good sign -- and in the past week it grew eve
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 11:05 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Two weeks into the commitfest, things have moved a bit:
>
> Needs review: 53.
> Waiting on Author: 20.
> Ready for Committer: 10.
> Committed: 16.
> Total: 99. https://commitfest.postgresql.org/8/
>
> We have two committed
Two weeks into the commitfest, things have moved a bit:
Needs review: 53.
Waiting on Author: 20.
Ready for Committer: 10.
Committed: 16.
Total: 99. https://commitfest.postgresql.org/8/
We have two committed patches since last report -- not a lot for a whole
week. We've managed t
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 6:38 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> * Partial sort
That shouldn't have been in "needs review" state. Fixed.
--
Peter Geoghegan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/
On 11 January 2016 at 14:38, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> * Simon Riggs
> Fix handling on XLOG_RUNNING_XACTS generated by bgwriter on idle
> systems
>
> I assume this means they intend to commit them in some reasonable
> timeframe (possibly after some rework). If this is not the case, please
> l
These are the numbers after one week of commitfest work:
Needs review: 65.
Waiting on Author: 14.
Ready for Committer: 6.
Committed: 14.
Total: 99.
The attentive reader might notice that we grew one more patch since last
week, which is the "VACUUM progress checker" thingy that has been under
Here are the current numbers, now that the commitfest has actually
closed for business:
Needs review: 79.
Waiting on Author: 5.
Ready for Committer: 6.
Committed: 8.
Total: 98.
Of those RfC patches, one ("Default Roles") doesn't actually seem ready
to commit, since there's been some significa
Hello,
As discussed, I will be managing the commitfest process this time
around. Please, everyone, make sure patches are registered in the app
today. As of this instant, we have:
Needs review: 73.
Waiting on Author: 5.
Ready for Committer: 6.
Committed: 5.
Total: 89.
Thanks,
--
Álvaro H
28 matches
Mail list logo