Re: [HACKERS] 9.2 commitfest closure (was Command Triggers, v16)

2012-03-28 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
 Fine. What do you propose, specifically?

 The end of the month is coming up.  How about we propose to close the
 'fest on April 1st?  Anything that's not committable by then goes to
 the 9.3 list.  If one week seems too short, how about 2 weeks?

 Let's split the difference: how about we close it a week from this
 Friday.  That would be April 6, 2012, ten days from today.

Anybody, anybody?  Can we try to get some agreement on this?

-- 
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/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


Re: [HACKERS] 9.2 commitfest closure (was Command Triggers, v16)

2012-03-28 Thread Simon Riggs
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
 Fine. What do you propose, specifically?

 The end of the month is coming up.  How about we propose to close the
 'fest on April 1st?  Anything that's not committable by then goes to
 the 9.3 list.  If one week seems too short, how about 2 weeks?

 Let's split the difference: how about we close it a week from this
 Friday.  That would be April 6, 2012, ten days from today.

 Anybody, anybody?  Can we try to get some agreement on this?

I agree.

I have a few projects still on the table myself, but my main concern
is Alvaro's FK locks patch. Depending on how the bones lie I will
finish up some combination of those by end of next week.

-- 
 Simon Riggs   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training  Services

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


Re: [HACKERS] 9.2 commitfest closure (was Command Triggers, v16)

2012-03-28 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
 On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
 Let's split the difference: how about we close it a week from this
 Friday.  That would be April 6, 2012, ten days from today.

 Anybody, anybody?  Can we try to get some agreement on this?

Works for me.

regards, tom lane

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


Re: [HACKERS] 9.2 commitfest closure (was Command Triggers, v16)

2012-03-28 Thread Noah Misch
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 09:45:29AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
 On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
  Let's split the difference: how about we close it a week from this
  Friday. ?That would be April 6, 2012, ten days from today.
 
 Anybody, anybody?  Can we try to get some agreement on this?

+1

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


Re: [HACKERS] 9.2 commitfest closure (was Command Triggers, v16)

2012-03-27 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 12:39 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:

 Thom Brown t...@linux.com writes:
 This is probably a dumb question but... surely there's more than 2
 committers able to review?

 Able and willing might be two different things.  Alvaro, Heikki, and
 Magnus have all been looking at stuff, but I think they may be getting
 burned out too.

If people are keeping score, add myself and Robert also, maybe others
- I've not been watching too closely.

On average there appears to be about 10 patches per active committer
in this CF. Given the complexity of the patches in last CF always
seems to be higher, that is a huge number and represents weeks of
work.

One of the key problems I see is that few people actually get paid to
do this, so its fairly hard to allocate time. I want to make it a
policy of 1 for 1 so if you write a patch you need to review a
patch. That way sponsors are forced to spend money on review time for
stuff they may not care about as a trade for getting reviews on stuff
they do. This would take pressure off the few.

-- 
 Simon Riggs   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training  Services

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


Re: [HACKERS] 9.2 commitfest closure (was Command Triggers, v16)

2012-03-27 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
 Fine. What do you propose, specifically?

 The end of the month is coming up.  How about we propose to close the
 'fest on April 1st?  Anything that's not committable by then goes to
 the 9.3 list.  If one week seems too short, how about 2 weeks?

Let's split the difference: how about we close it a week from this
Friday.  That would be April 6, 2012, ten days from today.

-- 
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/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


Re: [HACKERS] 9.2 commitfest closure (was Command Triggers, v16)

2012-03-26 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
 On Mar 26, 2012, at 5:36 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
 2. I'm not sure which patches Tom is planning to look at or in what
 order, so I've been avoiding the ones he seems to be taking an
 interest in.

 Well, I think I'm definitely on the hook for the pg_stat_statements,
 pgsql_fdw, foreign table stats, and caching-stable-subexpressions
 patches, and I should look at the libpq alternate row returning
 mechanism because I suspect I was the last one to mess with that libpq
 code in any detail.

 How long will that all take?

Dunno, but surely at least a day apiece if they're to be pushed to
commit.  On the other hand, considering that none of them is actually
Ready For Committer right now, we possibly shouldn't expect that they'll
all get committed.

 Personally, I am about at the point where I'd like to punt everything
 and move on.  As nice as it would be to squeeze a few more things into
 9.2, there WILL be a 9.3.  If a few less people had submitted
 half-baked code at the last minute and a few more people had helped
 with review, we'd be done by now.

 The main reason I proposed setting a schedule a few weeks ago was that
 I was afraid the commitfest would otherwise end precisely in a we're
 tired out, we're punting everything to 9.3 moment.  Without some
 definite goal to work towards, it'll just keep stretching out until
 we've had enough.  I'd prefer it end in a more orderly fashion than
 that.  The end result will be the same, in the sense that some of the
 stuff that's still-not-ready-for-committer is going to get punted,
 but people might have a less bad taste in their mouths about why.

 Fine. What do you propose, specifically?

The end of the month is coming up.  How about we propose to close the
'fest on April 1st?  Anything that's not committable by then goes to
the 9.3 list.  If one week seems too short, how about 2 weeks?

Thom Brown t...@linux.com writes:
 This is probably a dumb question but... surely there's more than 2
 committers able to review?

Able and willing might be two different things.  Alvaro, Heikki, and
Magnus have all been looking at stuff, but I think they may be getting
burned out too.

regards, tom lane

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


Re: [HACKERS] 9.2 commitfest closure (was Command Triggers, v16)

2012-03-26 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 01:39, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
 Thom Brown t...@linux.com writes:
 This is probably a dumb question but... surely there's more than 2
 committers able to review?

 Able and willing might be two different things.  Alvaro, Heikki, and
 Magnus have all been looking at stuff, but I think they may be getting
 burned out too.

Can't honestly claim I've been burned out by it - more that I feel bad
fo rnot having done my part :-O

It's not the CF itself, but a whole lot of other things (non-postgres)
that have been taking my time.

I'll try to get my head around the pg_stat_bgwriter patch - which I
htink actually has the wrong status on the CF page after talking to
Greg about it tonight.

-- 
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers