Re: [HACKERS] Postgres 9.6 scariest patch tournament

2016-05-05 Thread Alvaro Herrera
This is raw, in case anyone wants to look more closely. alvherre=# select level, count(*), patch, subject from scary left join commits on patch = sha1 group by level, patch, subject order by level asc, count(*) desc;

Re: [HACKERS] Postgres 9.6 scariest patch tournament

2016-05-05 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > "Parallel Query" got many mentions; some of them were specific commits > (such as "parallel infrastructure", "parallel joins", "parallel > aggregates") and others were more generic. For the generic mentions I > just chose a few of the most salient patches, but didn't

Re: [HACKERS] Postgres 9.6 scariest patch tournament

2016-05-05 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Noah Misch wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 03:37:21PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > The RMT will publish aggregate, unattributed results after the poll > > closes. Here are some more detailed results. We got 15 valid replies. One person voted twice, mentioning the same patches both times in

Re: [HACKERS] Postgres 9.6 scariest patch tournament

2016-05-04 Thread Josh berkus
On 05/04/2016 06:56 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 9:41 PM, Noah Misch wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 03:37:21PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >>> The RMT will publish aggregate, unattributed results after the poll >>> closes. >> >> Thanks for voting. Join

Re: [HACKERS] Postgres 9.6 scariest patch tournament

2016-05-04 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 9:41 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 03:37:21PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> The RMT will publish aggregate, unattributed results after the poll >> closes. > > Thanks for voting. Join me in congratulating our top finishers: > > 1.

Re: [HACKERS] Postgres 9.6 scariest patch tournament

2016-05-04 Thread Noah Misch
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 03:37:21PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > The RMT will publish aggregate, unattributed results after the poll > closes. Thanks for voting. Join me in congratulating our top finishers: 1. fd31cd2 Dont vacuum all-frozen pages. 2. "Parallel Query" 3(tie). 3fc6e2d Make the

Re: [HACKERS] Postgres 9.6 scariest patch tournament

2016-04-28 Thread Noah Misch
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 03:37:21PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > The PostgreSQL Project needs you! > > The Release Management Team would like your input regarding the patch or > patches which, in your opinion, are the most likely sources of major > bugs or instabilities in PostgreSQL 9.6. > >

Re: [HACKERS] Postgres 9.6 scariest patch tournament

2016-04-19 Thread David Fetter
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 04:06:55PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera writes: > > Peter Geoghegan wrote: > >> I would have appreciated more scope to say how confident I am in > >> my prediction, and how scary in absolute terms I consider the > >> scariest patches to

Re: [HACKERS] Postgres 9.6 scariest patch tournament

2016-04-19 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > This guy reads my mind. Where's my tinfoil hat? Heh. Well, I'm generally not in favor of communicating concerns without an obligation to defend them, but it could work well in tiny doses. Offering hackers a

Re: [HACKERS] Postgres 9.6 scariest patch tournament

2016-04-19 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera writes: > Peter Geoghegan wrote: >> I would have appreciated more scope to say how confident I am in my >> prediction, and how scary in absolute terms I consider the scariest >> patches to be. > It was purposefully ambiguous. Maybe it should have been

Re: [HACKERS] Postgres 9.6 scariest patch tournament

2016-04-19 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Josh berkus wrote: > > We should send the owner of the scariest patch something as a prize. > > Maybe a plastic skeleton or something ... > > I think it was a good idea to call it the scariest patch rather than >

Re: [HACKERS] Postgres 9.6 scariest patch tournament

2016-04-19 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Josh berkus wrote: > We should send the owner of the scariest patch something as a prize. > Maybe a plastic skeleton or something ... I think it was a good idea to call it the scariest patch rather than something more severe sounding. Having

Re: [HACKERS] Postgres 9.6 scariest patch tournament

2016-04-19 Thread Chapman Flack
On 04/18/2016 04:22 PM, Josh berkus wrote: > > We should send the owner of the scariest patch something as a prize. > Maybe a plastic skeleton or something ... A mouse. -Chap -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription:

Re: [HACKERS] Postgres 9.6 scariest patch tournament

2016-04-18 Thread Josh berkus
On 04/18/2016 11:37 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Hackers, lurkers, > > The PostgreSQL Project needs you! > > The Release Management Team would like your input regarding the patch or > patches which, in your opinion, are the most likely sources of major > bugs or instabilities in PostgreSQL 9.6. >

Re: [HACKERS] Postgres 9.6 scariest patch tournament

2016-04-18 Thread Bill Moran
On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 15:37:21 -0300 Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Hackers, lurkers, > > The PostgreSQL Project needs you! > > The Release Management Team would like your input regarding the patch or > patches which, in your opinion, are the most likely sources of major > bugs