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

Re: Parallel query execution

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>,Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>,Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>,Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>,pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Parallel query execution
Date: 2013-01-16 16:02:10
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 08:42:29AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Daniel Farina (daniel(at)heroku(dot)com) wrote:
> > I have been skimming the commitfest application, and unlike some of
> > the previous commitfests a huge number of patches have had review at
> > some point in time, but probably need looking for the red
> > "Nobody" in the 'reviewers' column probably understates the shortage
> > of review.
> I've been frustrated by that myself.  I realize we don't want to
> duplicate work but I'm really starting to think that having the
> Reviewers column has turned out to actually work against us.

That column tells the CF manager whom to browbeat.  Without a CF manager, a
stale entry can indeed make a patch look under-control when it isn't.

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2013-01-16 16:08:31
Subject: Re: Teaching pg_receivexlog to follow timeline switches
Previous:From: Noah MischDate: 2013-01-16 15:56:14
Subject: Re: CF3+4 (was Re: Parallel query execution)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group