Re: SSI patch(es)

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, drkp(at)csail(dot)mit(dot)edu, john(dot)okite(at)gmail(dot)org
Subject: Re: SSI patch(es)
Date: 2011-01-09 14:57:14
Message-ID: 4D29CCCA.7020001@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 09.01.2011 05:06, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Kevin Grittner
> <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
>> Splitting out those three would leave src/backend/ and src/include/
>> which comes in at a svelte 5891 lines.
>>
>> With a little more work I could split the three new files
>> (predicate.c, predicate.h, and predicate_internals.h) out from the
>> changes scattered around the rest of the code. That's 4346 lines and
>> 1545 lines, respectively.
>>
>> Now, these numbers are likely to change a little in the next few
>> days, but not much as a percentage outside the documentation.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> Well, my first thought is - I'm not sure it's realistic to think we're
> going to get this committed to 9.1.
>
> But that's not a very helpful thought. I just don't know who is going
> to review 7700 lines of code in the next month, and it doesn't sound
> like it can be decomposed into independent subfeatures that can be
> committed independently.

I'm tempted to raise my hand and volunteer, but I don't want to make
promises I might not be able to keep. But I'll definitely at least take
another look at it.

I don't think pushing this to 9.2 helps at all. This patch has gone
through several rounds of reviews already, and unless someone sees a
major issue with it, it's not going to get any more ready by postponing
it. And it wouldn't be fair to Kevin and others who've worked hard on
it. We'll just have to slurp it in somehow.

> Splitting it up by directory isn't really
> all that helpful.

Agreed. If it can't easily be split into increments by functionality,
then we'll just have to deal with it as on big patch.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-01-09 16:31:38 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Properly install gram.h on MSVC builds
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2011-01-09 14:53:28 Re: system views for walsender activity