Re: New trigger option of pg_standby

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Guillaume Smet <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: New trigger option of pg_standby
Date: 2009-05-27 21:16:07
Message-ID: 200905272116.n4RLG7M12146@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas wrote:
> Tom and Bruce do give way before a clear consensus, but on the other
> hand I think Simon is right that there was never much chance of
> getting anything committed here without Heikki's endorsement, which
> was slow in coming by his own admission. (I'm not in any way saying
> he was wrong to withhold his endorsement, just that he did.)
>
> I think it's undeniable that the voices of the committers carry
> significantly more weight than those of others on this mailing list,
> and especially that of Tom because of the sheer volume of what he
> commits compared to anyone else. Having one of the committers say
> that they don't like your patch doesn't completely kill its chances of
> getting accepted, but it definitely turns it into an uphill battle.
> On the other hand, if one of the committers takes a fancy to your
> patch it will occasionally jump ahead of the queue and get reviewed or
> committed before patches submitted much earlier. And more than one
> committer got features into 8.4 that were not really done in time for
> the 11/08 CommitFest, and likely would have been rejected if they'd
> come from a non-committer.
>
> As a thought experiment, consider two patches, one of which has a +1
> from Tom Lane and a -1 from some other respected community member who
> is not a committer, and the other of which has a +1 from the community
> member and a -1 from Tom Lane. Which do you think is more likely to
> get committed? I know what I'd pick.
>
> Now, in many cases, the fact that the committers speak with the
> loudest voices is a good thing, because they are mostly very good
> coders with lots of PostgreSQL experience and a proven track record of
> not breaking the tree too often. But that doesn't make it any less
> true.

The above comments by Robert are very perceptive, and there is certainly
truth that committer-endorsed patches are applied quicker than others.
My only additional comment is that over time, reliable patch submitters
become committers, so hopefully things balance out over time.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2009-05-27 21:20:54 Re: search_path vs extensions
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-05-27 21:14:32 Re: search_path vs extensions