On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 1:39 AM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 01:56:42PM -0500, Mike Blackwell wrote:> Any > patches marked Needs Review will be automatically moved to the next CF. > > We will try to make sure that all patches in the current CF have > received > > at least one review. > > The combined effect of those two statements is not clear to me. Does that > mean you'll retain never-reviewed patches and automatically move patches > that > have received at least one review? > Yes on the latter part. We will try to get a quick review for not-yet-reviewed patches and move or return them based on the result of that review. If we fail to find a reviewer, the patches will get moved to the next CF. For those following along, here are the patches still needing a first look. They are for the most part performance or internals patches and could use the eye of someone more experienced. Please consider a quick review of one of them if you fit that description. We'd like everyone to get a fair shake here. ^_^ HStore Gin Speedup<https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1203> Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation<https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1209> [PoC] pgstattuple2: block sampling to reduce physical read<https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1226> ECPG cursor readahead<https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1195>
