Re: Recovery Test Framework

Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>> Robert Haas wrote:
>>> (It would be interesting to here how much value people think it has
>>> added, and get suggestions on how to do things better next time.)
>
>> I'm not sure how much round-robin-review has taken load off committers,
>> you have to read and understand a patch before committing anyway. It has
>> helped, for sure, but not dramatically. However, I think that it has
>> made a big difference from authors point of view; you get feedback earlier.
>
> I think it's helped from the committers' standpoint too, in the form of
> taking care of some issues that would otherwise have had to be dealt
> with by the committer. (Which was all we asked for anyway.)

I was pleasantly surprised by how helpful the feedback was on posix_fadvise. I
don't know how much real work it removed from Tom's plate but I suspect it did
reduce the little annoyances significantly.

> In my mind though, the real benefit of the system and the reason we
> should keep it up is to get more people looking at the code. New
> committers don't grow on trees, they come from people getting involved.

Good point.

--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication support!