From: | Pavel Golub <pavel(at)microolap(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Remaining 'needs review' patchs in July commitfest |
Date: | 2015-07-29 12:25:20 |
Message-ID: | 139522573.20150729152520@gf.microolap.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello, Heikki.
You wrote:
HL> 21 patches remain in Needs Review state, in the July commitfest. Some of
HL> them have a reviewer signed up. I have highlighted some of them below
HL> that worry me the most. What are we going to do about these? For each of
HL> them, I'd like the authors to have some idea on what they need to do to
HL> get the patch into committable state (or if the whole approach is going
HL> to be rejected), but I don't know what that advise should be.
>> COPY RAW
HL> No consensus on whether to add this to the server's COPY command, or as
HL> a new psql backslash option.
I did quick review for this, however I need some more time for tests. May be I will
do it next week. There is a consensus, only detailed review needed.
HL> --
HL> - Heikki
--
With best wishes,
Pavel mailto:pavel(at)gf(dot)microolap(dot)com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-07-29 12:28:37 | Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2 |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2015-07-29 12:22:23 | Re: LWLock deadlock and gdb advice |