| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jacob Champion <jchampion(at)timescale(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [Commitfest 2022-07] Begins Now |
| Date: | 2022-07-18 19:32:01 |
| Message-ID: | 20220718193201.3c3qja7dhevgkzuh@awork3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2022-07-18 12:22:25 -0700, Jacob Champion wrote:
> [dev hat]
>
> On 7/15/22 18:07, Andres Freund wrote:
> > IDK, I've plenty times given feedback and it took months till it all was
> > implemented. What's the point of doing further rounds of review until then?
>
> I guess I would wonder why we're optimizing for that case. Is it helpful
> for that patch to stick around in an active CF for months?
I'm not following - I'm talking about the patch author needing a while to
address the higher level feedback given by a reviewer. The author might put
out a couple new versions, which each might still benefit from review. In that
- pretty common imo - situation I don't think it's useful for the reviewer
that provided the higher level feedback to be removed from the patch.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2022-07-18 19:55:48 | Re: BUG #17434: CREATE/DROP DATABASE can be executed in the same transaction with other commands |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-07-18 19:29:37 | Re: [PATCH] Introduce array_shuffle() and array_sample() |