Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Dave Page]

On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 at 13:52, Andrew Dunstan  wrote:

>
> On 3/19/22 14:48, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2022-03-03 13:37:35 +, Dave Page wrote:
> >> On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 13:28, Pavel Borisov 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The mail system doesn't have the capability to apply different
> moderation
>  rules for people in that way I'm afraid.
> 
> >>> Maybe then 2MB for everyone? Otherwise it's not so convenient. Lead to
> >>> answers before the questions in the thread [1], seems weird.
> >>>
> >> Then someone will complain if their patch is 2.1MB! How often are
> messages
> >> legitimately over 1MB anyway, even with a patch? I don't usually
> moderate
> >> -hackers, so I don't know if this is a common thing or not.
> > I don't think it's actually that rare. But most contributors writing that
> > large patchsets know about the limit and work around it - I gzip patches
> when
> > I see the email getting too large. But it's more annoying to work with
> for
> > reviewers.
> >
> > It's somewhat annoying. If you e.g. append a few graphs of performance
> changes
> > and a patch it's pretty easy to get into the range where compressing
> won't
> > help anymore.
> >
> > And sure, any limit may be hit by somebody. But 1MB across the whole
> email
> > seems pretty low these days.
> >
>
> Of course we could get complaints no matter what level we set the limit
> at. I think raising it to 2Mb would be a reasonable experiment. If no
> observable evil ensues then leave it that way. If it does then roll it
> back. I agree that plain uncompressed patches are easier to deal with in
> general.
>

Thanks for the reminder :-)

I've bumped the limit to 2MB.

-- 
Dave Page
Blog: https://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Pavel Borisov]

>
> оf course we could get complaints no matter what level we set the limit
> at. I think raising it to 2Mb would be a reasonable experiment. If no
> observable evil ensues then leave it that way. If it does then roll it
> back. I agree that plain uncompressed patches are easier to deal with in
> general.
>
Thanks, Andrew! I think it will be more comfortable now.

Pavel.

>

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Andrew Dunstan]

On 3/19/22 14:48, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-03-03 13:37:35 +, Dave Page wrote:
>> On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 13:28, Pavel Borisov  wrote:
>>
>>> The mail system doesn't have the capability to apply different moderation
 rules for people in that way I'm afraid.

>>> Maybe then 2MB for everyone? Otherwise it's not so convenient. Lead to
>>> answers before the questions in the thread [1], seems weird.
>>>
>> Then someone will complain if their patch is 2.1MB! How often are messages
>> legitimately over 1MB anyway, even with a patch? I don't usually moderate
>> -hackers, so I don't know if this is a common thing or not.
> I don't think it's actually that rare. But most contributors writing that
> large patchsets know about the limit and work around it - I gzip patches when
> I see the email getting too large. But it's more annoying to work with for
> reviewers.
>
> It's somewhat annoying. If you e.g. append a few graphs of performance changes
> and a patch it's pretty easy to get into the range where compressing won't
> help anymore.
>
> And sure, any limit may be hit by somebody. But 1MB across the whole email
> seems pretty low these days.
>

Of course we could get complaints no matter what level we set the limit
at. I think raising it to 2Mb would be a reasonable experiment. If no
observable evil ensues then leave it that way. If it does then roll it
back. I agree that plain uncompressed patches are easier to deal with in
general.


cheers


andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Andres Freund]

Hi,

On 2022-03-03 13:37:35 +, Dave Page wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 13:28, Pavel Borisov  wrote:
> 
> > The mail system doesn't have the capability to apply different moderation
> >> rules for people in that way I'm afraid.
> >>
> > Maybe then 2MB for everyone? Otherwise it's not so convenient. Lead to
> > answers before the questions in the thread [1], seems weird.
> >
> 
> Then someone will complain if their patch is 2.1MB! How often are messages
> legitimately over 1MB anyway, even with a patch? I don't usually moderate
> -hackers, so I don't know if this is a common thing or not.

I don't think it's actually that rare. But most contributors writing that
large patchsets know about the limit and work around it - I gzip patches when
I see the email getting too large. But it's more annoying to work with for
reviewers.

It's somewhat annoying. If you e.g. append a few graphs of performance changes
and a patch it's pretty easy to get into the range where compressing won't
help anymore.

And sure, any limit may be hit by somebody. But 1MB across the whole email
seems pretty low these days.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Stephen Frost]

Greetings,

* Pavel Borisov (pashkin.e...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 13:28, Pavel Borisov  wrote:
> >> The mail system doesn't have the capability to apply different moderation
> >>> rules for people in that way I'm afraid.
> >>>
> >> Maybe then 2MB for everyone? Otherwise it's not so convenient. Lead to
> >> answers before the questions in the thread [1], seems weird.
> >
> > Then someone will complain if their patch is 2.1MB! How often are messages
> > legitimately over 1MB anyway, even with a patch? I don't usually moderate
> > -hackers, so I don't know if this is a common thing or not.

I do pay attention to -hackers and no, it doesn't come up very often.

> Authors in the mentioned thread [1] bump into this issue while posting all
> 11 versions of a patchset. It is little bit more than 1MB. We can try to
> use .gz and if this doesn't work we report it again.

This patch set really shoudl be broken down into smaller independent
pieces that attack different parts and not be all one big series of
patches.

Thanks,

Stephen


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Stephen Frost]

Greetings,

* Aleksander Alekseev (aleksan...@timescale.com) wrote:
> My last email to pgsql-jobs@ was moderated in a similar fashion. To my
> knowledge that mailing list is not pre-moderated. So it may have the same
> problem, and not only with patches. (We use regular Google Workspace.)

-jobs is moderated.

Thanks,

Stephen


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Julien Rouhaud]

On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 10:17:06AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Pavel Borisov  writes:
> >> The mail system doesn't have the capability to apply different moderation
> >> rules for people in that way I'm afraid.
> 
> > Maybe then 2MB for everyone?
> 
> Maybe your patch needs to be split up?  You're going to have a hard time
> finding people who want to review or commit such large chunks.

I think it's the total attachment size, not a single file.  So while splitting
up the patchset even more would still be a good idea, compressing the files
before sending them to hundred of people would be an even better one.

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Tom Lane]

Pavel Borisov  writes:
>> The mail system doesn't have the capability to apply different moderation
>> rules for people in that way I'm afraid.

> Maybe then 2MB for everyone?

Maybe your patch needs to be split up?  You're going to have a hard time
finding people who want to review or commit such large chunks.

regards, tom lane

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Aleksander Alekseev]

Hi again,

> Any chance we could include the reason in the message? I foresee that
> otherwise such kinds of questions will be asked over and over again.

A link to the list of common reasons should work too.

-- 
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Pavel Borisov]

>
> On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 13:28, Pavel Borisov  wrote:
>
>> The mail system doesn't have the capability to apply different moderation
>>> rules for people in that way I'm afraid.
>>>
>> Maybe then 2MB for everyone? Otherwise it's not so convenient. Lead to
>> answers before the questions in the thread [1], seems weird.
>>
>
> Then someone will complain if their patch is 2.1MB! How often are messages
> legitimately over 1MB anyway, even with a patch? I don't usually moderate
> -hackers, so I don't know if this is a common thing or not.
>
Hi, Dave!
Authors in the mentioned thread [1] bump into this issue while posting all
11 versions of a patchset. It is little bit more than 1MB. We can try to
use .gz and if this doesn't work we report it again.

I'll ping a message across to the sysadmin team anyway; I can't just change
> that setting without buy-in from the rest of the team.
>
Thanks! Maybe this will solve the issue.

[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CACG%3DezZe1NQSCnfHOr78AtAZxJZeCvxrts0ygrxYwe%3DpyyjVWA%40mail.gmail.com

-- 
Best regards,
Pavel Borisov

Postgres Professional: http://postgrespro.com 

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Julien Rouhaud]

On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 01:37:35PM +, Dave Page wrote:
>
> Then someone will complain if their patch is 2.1MB! How often are messages
> legitimately over 1MB anyway, even with a patch? I don't usually moderate
> -hackers, so I don't know if this is a common thing or not.

It's not common, most people send compressed versions.

Also, gigantic patchsets tend to be hard to maintain and rot pretty fast, so
authors also sometimes maintain a branch on some external repository and just
send newer versions on the ML infrequently.

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Aleksander Alekseev]

Hi Dave,

> Then someone will complain if their patch is 2.1MB! How often are messages 
> legitimately over 1MB anyway, even with a patch? I don't usually moderate 
> -hackers, so I don't know if this is a common thing or not.
>
> I'll ping a message across to the sysadmin team anyway; I can't just change 
> that setting without buy-in from the rest of the team.

IMO, current limits are OK. The actual problem is that when the
message gets into moderation, the notice to the author doesn't contain
the reason:

> Your message to pgsql-hackers with subject
> "Re: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15"
> has been held for moderation.
>
> It will be delivered to the list recipients as soon as it has been
> approved by a moderator.
>
> If you wish to cancel the message without delivery, please click
> this link: 

Any chance we could include the reason in the message? I foresee that
otherwise such kinds of questions will be asked over and over again.

--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Dave Page]

On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 13:28, Pavel Borisov  wrote:

> The mail system doesn't have the capability to apply different moderation
>> rules for people in that way I'm afraid.
>>
> Maybe then 2MB for everyone? Otherwise it's not so convenient. Lead to
> answers before the questions in the thread [1], seems weird.
>

Then someone will complain if their patch is 2.1MB! How often are messages
legitimately over 1MB anyway, even with a patch? I don't usually moderate
-hackers, so I don't know if this is a common thing or not.

I'll ping a message across to the sysadmin team anyway; I can't just change
that setting without buy-in from the rest of the team.

-- 
Dave Page
Blog: https://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Pavel Borisov]

>
> There's a FAQ link on the cfbot main page that answers this kind of
> questions.
>
Good to know! I'll try [.gz] next time then.

Thanks!

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Julien Rouhaud]

On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 04:24:03PM +0300, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
> 
> Thanks! Does anyone know if cfbot understands .patch.gz and/or .tgz ?

There's a FAQ link on the cfbot main page that answers this kind of questions.

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Pavel Borisov]

>
> The mail system doesn't have the capability to apply different moderation
> rules for people in that way I'm afraid.
>
Maybe then 2MB for everyone? Otherwise it's not so convenient. Lead to
answers before the questions in the thread [1], seems weird.

[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CACG%3DezZe1NQSCnfHOr78AtAZxJZeCvxrts0ygrxYwe%3DpyyjVWA%40mail.gmail.com



-- 
Best regards,
Pavel Borisov

Postgres Professional: http://postgrespro.com 

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Dave Page]

On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 13:22, Pavel Borisov  wrote:

> Message to list pgsql-hackers held for moderation due to 'Size 1MB
>> (1061796 bytes) is larger than threshold 1000KB (1024000 bytes)', notice
>> queued for 2 moderators
>>
> Could you make this limit 2MB at least for authorized commitfest members?
> Thanks!
>

The mail system doesn't have the capability to apply different moderation
rules for people in that way I'm afraid.

-- 
Dave Page
Blog: https://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Aleksander Alekseev]

Hi Dave,

> Message to list pgsql-hackers held for moderation due to 'Size 1MB (1061796 
> bytes) is larger than threshold 1000KB (1024000 bytes)', notice queued for 2 
> moderators

Thanks! Does anyone know if cfbot understands .patch.gz and/or .tgz ?

-- 
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Pavel Borisov]

>
> Message to list pgsql-hackers held for moderation due to 'Size 1MB
> (1061796 bytes) is larger than threshold 1000KB (1024000 bytes)', notice
> queued for 2 moderators
>
Could you make this limit 2MB at least for authorized commitfest members?
Thanks!

--
Best regards,
Pavel Borisov

Postgres Professional: http://postgrespro.com 

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Dave Page]

Hi

On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 12:31, Pavel Borisov  wrote:

> Hi, hackers!
>
> Around 2 months ago I've noticed a problem that messages containing
> patches in the thread [1] were always processed with manual moderation.
> They appear in hackers' thread hours after posting None of them are from
> new CF members and personally, I don't see a reason for such inconvenience.
> The problem still exists as of today.
>
> Can someone make changes in a moderation engine to make it more liberal
> and convenient for authors?
>
> [1]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CACG%3DezZe1NQSCnfHOr78AtAZxJZeCvxrts0ygrxYwe%3DpyyjVWA%40mail.gmail.com
>

Here's the moderation reason for that message:

Message to list pgsql-hackers held for moderation due to 'Size 1MB (1061796
bytes) is larger than threshold 1000KB (1024000 bytes)', notice queued for
2 moderators

-- 
Dave Page
Blog: https://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Aleksander Alekseev]

Hi hackers,

> Confirm

Here are my two cents.

My last email to pgsql-jobs@ was moderated in a similar fashion. To my
knowledge that mailing list is not pre-moderated. So it may have the same
problem, and not only with patches. (We use regular Google Workspace.)

The pgsql-hackers@ thread under question seems to have two mailing list
addresses in cc:. Maybe this is the reason [1]:

> Cross-posted emails will be moderated and therefore will also take longer
to reach the subscribers if approved.

Although it's strange that only emails with attachments seem to be affected.

[1]: https://www.postgresql.org/list/

-- 
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev

Re: Problem with moderation of messages with patched attached.

[Maxim Orlov]

On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 3:31 PM Pavel Borisov  wrote:

> Hi, hackers!
>
> Around 2 months ago I've noticed a problem that messages containing
> patches in the thread [1] were always processed with manual moderation.
> They appear in hackers' thread hours after posting None of them are from
> new CF members and personally, I don't see a reason for such inconvenience.
> The problem still exists as of today.
>
> Can someone make changes in a moderation engine to make it more liberal
> and convenient for authors?
>
> [1]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CACG%3DezZe1NQSCnfHOr78AtAZxJZeCvxrts0ygrxYwe%3DpyyjVWA%40mail.gmail.com
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Pavel Borisov
>
> Postgres Professional: http://postgrespro.com 
>

Confirm

-- 
Best regards,
Maxim Orlov.