Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: CommitFest 2010-07 week one progress report

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-rrreviewers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: CommitFest 2010-07 week one progress report
Date: 2010-07-22 18:51:13
Message-ID: AANLkTikVyeuOYUR0m9KJKOq3nUihYJ2fwG+XhiasMYZf@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-rrreviewers
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> 48 pending
>  8 ready for committer

Note that all of the patches except one which are marked as "Ready for
Committer" were either submitted by a committer, or the reviewer is a
committer.  Of those, 3 are mine.  Two of those are patches I'm
postponing committing at the request of Tom Lane to avoid making the
9.1 and 9.0 trees drift too much before 9.0 is out.  However, given
the rapidly decreasing frequency of commits to the 9.0 branch, I'm not
sure how much longer it makes sense to hold off: I'm currently
thinking I'll commit those two after beta4 wraps.  The last of those
is the 5-key syscaches patch, which only makes sense if knngist needs
it, so it may get bumped to the next CF, as knngist was not submitted
in time for this CF.  The other 4 patches were either submitted or
reviewed by Simon Riggs or Itagaki Takahiro, and I am presuming they
will commit them themselves unless I hear otherwise (in which case I'm
happy to pick them up).  That leaves just one patch that's actually
been reviewed and is ready to be picked up by a committer, so we
actually have a bit of a pipelines stall here.

> 18 patches have reviews due within four days or less

This is a very big number... I hope some of these reviews start to
come in soon.  I think this is where our bottleneck is at present.

> Although we've had some discussion around Markus Wanner's WIP
> refactoring patches and the prerequisite miscellaneous patches,
> there's nobody down as a Reviewer for any of them.  I understand
> that the six WIP patches are there for feedback, not with
> expectation of a commit in this CF, but I'm less clear about the two
> prerequisite patches.

It seems to me that the discussion is Alvaro and I are having with
Markus is tilted toward having Markus rewrite the imessages interface
to use an SLRU, in which case neither of them will go in this CF.  I'm
hopeful that Heikki or Tom will comment on this also when they get
back from their vacations.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-07-22 19:03:27
Subject: Re: Copy path in Dynamic programming
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2010-07-22 18:31:41
Subject: Re: dynamically allocating chunks from shared memory

pgsql-rrreviewers by date

Next:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2010-07-22 19:26:37
Subject: Re: CommitFest 2010-07 week one progress report
Previous:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2010-07-22 18:09:32
Subject: CommitFest 2010-07 week one progress report

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group