Re: [HACKERS] Closing out the June commitfest

2012-07-17 Thread Simon Riggs
On 16 July 2012 01:16, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
 We are now at the end of the originally scheduled one-month window for
 the June commitfest.  While the numbers look fairly bad:

 Needs Review: 17, Waiting on Author: 10, Ready for Committer: 3, Committed: 
 29, Returned with Feedback: 12, Rejected: 5. Total: 76.

 it's not quite a complete disaster, because almost all of the needs
 review patches did actually get some review and/or had new versions
 posted during the fest.  We did not get them to the point of being
 committable, but we did make progress.  I only see about three patches
 that seem to have received no attention whatsoever.

 At this point we could move the open items to the September fest and
 call this one good, or we could keep trying to close things out.
 Personally I'd like to do the former, because we really need to spend
 some effort on closing out the various open issues for 9.2, and the
 commitfest seems to have sucked up all the available time of those who
 might've been fixing those issues over the past month.

Sounds fine to me.

I've been unavailable for much of this CF, so my intention is to
continue with my parts of it. Meaning the reviews I was scheduled to
do won't be put off until Sept. But first, I'll review the 9.2 open
items list again.

That's a personal point, not trying to suggest everybody else should do that.

-- 
 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] Closing out the June commitfest

2012-07-16 Thread Josh Berkus

 Trim trailing NULL columns
 https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=840

Feh, put my name on this one for a performance test/functionality
review.  Someone else needs to do the code review though.

 None of the three above seem to me to be blocking further work,
 so I don't have a hard time with punting them to September.

Yeah, we should flag them so that they get reviewed first out of the
random patches in Sept., though.

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com



-- 
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] Closing out the June commitfest

2012-07-15 Thread Josh Berkus

 At this point we could move the open items to the September fest and
 call this one good, or we could keep trying to close things out.
 Personally I'd like to do the former, because we really need to spend
 some effort on closing out the various open issues for 9.2, and the
 commitfest seems to have sucked up all the available time of those who
 might've been fixing those issues over the past month.
 
 Thoughts?

Which three patches didn't get any review?

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com



-- 
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] Closing out the June commitfest

2012-07-15 Thread Josh Berkus

 Which three patches didn't get any review?

Or to be more specific: I'm in favor of closing out everything which has
had some review.  I think the three patches without any review should be
dealt with case-by-case.

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com



-- 
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] Closing out the June commitfest

2012-07-15 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On 16 July 2012 01:16, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
 At this point we could move the open items to the September fest and
 call this one good, or we could keep trying to close things out.
 Personally I'd like to do the former, because we really need to spend
 some effort on closing out the various open issues for 9.2, and the
 commitfest seems to have sucked up all the available time of those who
 might've been fixing those issues over the past month.

I didn't really have the opportunity to give more feedback to any of
the three patches that I'm reviewing last week, due to other
commitments. I expect to be able to spend more time on review this
week. I think that I stand a good chance of seeing at least one of
those three committed. Hopefully the passing of the nominal deadline
will help to focus things.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and 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] Closing out the June commitfest

2012-07-15 Thread Tom Lane
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
 Which three patches didn't get any review?

 Or to be more specific: I'm in favor of closing out everything which has
 had some review.  I think the three patches without any review should be
 dealt with case-by-case.

Well, I might be wrong, but the ones that don't show any activity in the
CF app are

tuplesort memory usage: grow_memtuples
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=818

Trim trailing NULL columns
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=840

Restrict ALTER FUNCTION CALLED ON NULL INPUT
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=854

(Note: some of the individual patches in the logical replication herd
haven't been given individual reviews, but certainly that patchset as a
whole has gotten its fair share of time and more.)

None of the three above seem to me to be blocking further work,
so I don't have a hard time with punting them to September.

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