Re: Fwd: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Feb 11, 2008 9:14 PM, Andy Colson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I dont think the buildfarm needs to require CVS. The code can be changed in the buildfarm to just run 'svn up' or 'git up and go' (sorry, never used git so I had to guess at the command :-) ) right? The relevant commands, for several of the tools, are: svn update git pull darcs pull --all hg pull mtn pull Distributed SCMs seem to favor pull over update The only thing about this that would be a bit tricky is that buildfarm presently treats a certain format of output as indicating that no changes were found. The expected output for other SCMs will differ somewhat. And this isn't so vastly tricky a matter as to be considered an obstacle. Indeed, I think that it would be an entirely reasonable thing to expect to modify buildfarm a little bit so that it could cope with multiple SCMs, and for us to have a few animals set up specifically to track some SCMs. This clearly ISN'T a barrier of the sort that Jan suggested. -- http://linuxfinances.info/info/linuxdistributions.html The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. -- assortedly attributed to Albert Einstein, Benjamin Franklin, Rita Mae Brown, and Rudyard Kipling ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: Fwd: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Saturday 09 February 2008 22:51, Christopher Browne wrote:
On Feb 9, 2008 4:58 PM, Jan Wieck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wonder if the efforts to provide mirrors for many different systems can
hurt later down the road. It is pretty obvious that amost every current
system has options to convert from or to mirror a CVS repository. But
what if we someday really want to use something else as the master
repository? Are we ready to accept losing unsupported mirrors at that
time, or will that actually influence the choice (I think that it should
not ... but I can hear the outcry already).
The primary reason for a hue and cry to happen would require several
prerequisites:
0. An SCM would be chosen to replace CVS. Let us identify it as SCM1
1. The ones hueing and crying would have chosen an SCM, SCM2, that
was different from SCM1, and, furthermore, one where there isn't any
tailor[1] available to permit translation of patches between them.
(I'm not sure that any of the options that people are thinking about
*aren't* on tailor's supported list...)
2. There is a further requirement for this lead to a hue and cry
that needs to be listened to, namely that some complex and
non-migratable processes have been set up that depend on SCM2.
I think we can avoid this by declaring up front that its a Really Dumb
Idea to set up complex processes that depend on a particular
alternative SCM without the nice big fat caveat that The PGDG has not
committed to migrating to any particular SCM at this time. Depend on
such at your peril!
Would a pre-requisite for any new SCM to be anointed as *the* new SCM that the
buildfarm can be reconfigured to run with it? Unless there is an SCM2CVS
option available I suppose... how many SCM's support such a thing?
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: Fwd: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Robert Treat wrote: On Saturday 09 February 2008 22:51, Christopher Browne wrote: On Feb 9, 2008 4:58 PM, Jan Wieck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wonder if the efforts to provide mirrors for many different systems can hurt later down the road. It is pretty obvious that amost every current system has options to convert from or to mirror a CVS repository. But what if we someday really want to use something else as the master repository? Are we ready to accept losing unsupported mirrors at that time, or will that actually influence the choice (I think that it should not ... but I can hear the outcry already). The primary reason for a hue and cry to happen would require several prerequisites: 0. An SCM would be chosen to replace CVS. Let us identify it as SCM1 1. The ones hueing and crying would have chosen an SCM, SCM2, that was different from SCM1, and, furthermore, one where there isn't any tailor[1] available to permit translation of patches between them. (I'm not sure that any of the options that people are thinking about *aren't* on tailor's supported list...) 2. There is a further requirement for this lead to a hue and cry that needs to be listened to, namely that some complex and non-migratable processes have been set up that depend on SCM2. I think we can avoid this by declaring up front that its a Really Dumb Idea to set up complex processes that depend on a particular alternative SCM without the nice big fat caveat that The PGDG has not committed to migrating to any particular SCM at this time. Depend on such at your peril! Would a pre-requisite for any new SCM to be anointed as *the* new SCM that the buildfarm can be reconfigured to run with it? Unless there is an SCM2CVS option available I suppose... how many SCM's support such a thing? I dont think the buildfarm needs to require CVS. The code can be changed in the buildfarm to just run 'svn up' or 'git up and go' (sorry, never used git so I had to guess at the command :-) ) right? -Andy ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: Fwd: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Andy Colson wrote: Would a pre-requisite for any new SCM to be anointed as *the* new SCM that the buildfarm can be reconfigured to run with it? Unless there is an SCM2CVS option available I suppose... how many SCM's support such a thing? I dont think the buildfarm needs to require CVS. The code can be changed in the buildfarm to just run 'svn up' or 'git up and go' (sorry, never used git so I had to guess at the command :-) ) right? Wrong. The buildfarm has quite a lot of CVS-specific intelligence in it that will need to be adapted to whatever we use to replace CVS. It is very far from plug and play. And I sure don't want to keep a CVS repo just on account of the buildfarm. If and when the one true postgres SCM changes, buildfarm should change along with it. Working out how is just a part of the problems we'll face. I have deliberately stayed out of this debate, since I have nothing much new to say (and I observe that nothing much new has been said ;-) ). But let me repeat a couple of things I have said previously: I want to make a change in SCM once only in the foreseeable future. And I'm in no great hurry. If I have a preference it is ever so slightly for Mercurial, but that's just based on impression rather than solid experience. I have used Subversion for quite some time - it has sorted out some of the more obvious wrinkles that CVS presents, but I'm not sure it's that much of a quantum leap that it's worht the trouble. I'll be interested to see what Mark Miekle says after looking at all the systems. cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: Fwd: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Andy Colson wrote: Robert Treat wrote: Would a pre-requisite for any new SCM to be anointed as *the* new SCM that the buildfarm can be reconfigured to run with it? Unless there is an SCM2CVS option available I suppose... how many SCM's support such a thing? I dont think the buildfarm needs to require CVS. The code can be changed in the buildfarm to just run 'svn up' or 'git up and go' (sorry, never used git so I had to guess at the command :-) ) right? As long as the build farm never writes results - certainly. Any system that pulls data from a central repository would work. Cheers, mark P.S. Depending on configuration, it might be 'git pull'. -- Mark Mielke [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: Fwd: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Andy Colson escribió: Robert Treat wrote: Would a pre-requisite for any new SCM to be anointed as *the* new SCM that the buildfarm can be reconfigured to run with it? Unless there is an SCM2CVS option available I suppose... how many SCM's support such a thing? I dont think the buildfarm needs to require CVS. The code can be changed in the buildfarm to just run 'svn up' or 'git up and go' (sorry, never used git so I had to guess at the command :-) ) right? In fact I don't see why the buildfarm couldn't be configurable to use whatever tool/repo the user sees fit. It's easy enough to detect whether a checked out copy is SVN or git or whatever, and act accordingly. -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: Fwd: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Monday 11 February 2008 18:18, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Andy Colson wrote:
Would a pre-requisite for any new SCM to be anointed as *the* new SCM
that the buildfarm can be reconfigured to run with it? Unless there
is an SCM2CVS option available I suppose... how many SCM's support
such a thing?
I dont think the buildfarm needs to require CVS. The code can be
changed in the buildfarm to just run 'svn up' or 'git up and go'
(sorry, never used git so I had to guess at the command :-) ) right?
Wrong. The buildfarm has quite a lot of CVS-specific intelligence in it
that will need to be adapted to whatever we use to replace CVS. It is
very far from plug and play. And I sure don't want to keep a CVS repo
just on account of the buildfarm. If and when the one true postgres
SCM changes, buildfarm should change along with it. Working out how is
just a part of the problems we'll face.
I have deliberately stayed out of this debate, since I have nothing much
new to say (and I observe that nothing much new has been said ;-) ). But
let me repeat a couple of things I have said previously:
I want to make a change in SCM once only in the foreseeable future. And
I'm in no great hurry. If I have a preference it is ever so slightly for
Mercurial, but that's just based on impression rather than solid
experience. I have used Subversion for quite some time - it has sorted
out some of the more obvious wrinkles that CVS presents, but I'm not
sure it's that much of a quantum leap that it's worht the trouble. I'll
be interested to see what Mark Miekle says after looking at all the
systems.
Switching from CVS to SVN is like switching from myisam to innodb; yeah, it's
an improvement, but you're still working with something fundementally broken.
Oooh...burnhiss :-P
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 12:39:36 -0300 Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andrew Dunstan escribió: Alvaro Herrera wrote: Florian Pflug escribió: Yeah, the SVN mirror in commandprompt.com is recreated from scratch every time. This sucks, we know -- I think it's on Joshua's list to change it to update incrementally. Can you document what you actually do on the developers' wiki? I'd prefer we do not advertise it until it's actually usable. Wait, what are we talking about? The SVN mirror we have right now is perfectly usable. It just has to be rebuilt a couple of times a day. Is that what you want documented? Or is it the incremental stuff you want documented? I have to have the incremental stuff working before we try that. Joshua D. Drake -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Joshua D. Drake wrote: On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 12:39:36 -0300 Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andrew Dunstan escribió: Alvaro Herrera wrote: Florian Pflug escribió: Yeah, the SVN mirror in commandprompt.com is recreated from scratch every time. This sucks, we know -- I think it's on Joshua's list to change it to update incrementally. Can you document what you actually do on the developers' wiki? I'd prefer we do not advertise it until it's actually usable. Wait, what are we talking about? The SVN mirror we have right now is perfectly usable. It just has to be rebuilt a couple of times a day. Is that what you want documented? Or is it the incremental stuff you want documented? I have to have the incremental stuff working before we try that. It used to be that you had problems if you tried to hit it at the same time as it was updating, IIRC. But it could be that it was fixed a long time ago :) //Magnus ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Joshua D. Drake wrote: Can you document what you actually do on the developers' wiki? I'd prefer we do not advertise it until it's actually usable. Wait, what are we talking about? The SVN mirror we have right now is perfectly usable. It just has to be rebuilt a couple of times a day. Is that what you want documented? Or is it the incremental stuff you want documented? I have to have the incremental stuff working before we try that. How about starting by telling us exactly what you're doing now. cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Andrew Dunstan escribió: Joshua D. Drake wrote: Can you document what you actually do on the developers' wiki? I'd prefer we do not advertise it until it's actually usable. Wait, what are we talking about? The SVN mirror we have right now is perfectly usable. It just has to be rebuilt a couple of times a day. Is that what you want documented? Or is it the incremental stuff you want documented? I have to have the incremental stuff working before we try that. It's usable as long as you checkout a copy and then avoid doing anything much with it. Trying to actually use it and svn update is likely to cause problems at some point. (I know I tried and failed once. I learned to avoid the fire when I was a child.) How about starting by telling us exactly what you're doing now. Twice a day a cvs2svn process runs, which creates a complete SVN repository from the complete CVS repository. -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
I wonder if the efforts to provide mirrors for many different systems can hurt later down the road. It is pretty obvious that amost every current system has options to convert from or to mirror a CVS repository. But what if we someday really want to use something else as the master repository? Are we ready to accept losing unsupported mirrors at that time, or will that actually influence the choice (I think that it should not ... but I can hear the outcry already). Jan -- Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security. -- Benjamin Franklin -Original Message- From: Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subj: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan Date: Fri Feb 8, 2008 7:15 Size: 773 bytes To: Brendan Jurd [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Markus Bertheau [EMAIL PROTECTED]; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Am Freitag, 8. Februar 2008 schrieb Brendan Jurd: In particular, if the git repos were officially supported, and best practises for use with Postgres documented, I think a lot more hackers would be comfortable using git to do their work, which is good for collaboration (as mentioned by Greg Stark and Heikki upthread). Well, I didn't want to announce anything before anything existed, but this is precisely what is being worked on. Watch for an announcement in this forum. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Feb 10, 2008 8:58 AM, Jan Wieck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wonder if the efforts to provide mirrors for many different systems can hurt later down the road. It is pretty obvious that amost every current system has options to convert from or to mirror a CVS repository. But what if we someday really want to use something else as the master repository? Are we ready to accept losing unsupported mirrors at that time, or will that actually influence the choice (I think that it should not ... but I can hear the outcry already). If an SCM comes along so compelling in its feature set that it convinces the Postgres committers to abandon CVS, I don't think anyone will complain about having to use it =) Seriously though, I think the main impetus for having these mirrors is that developers don't want to work with CVS. If the master repos was upgraded to a modern SCM, the importance of having mirrors would dwindle. Cheers, BJ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008, Jan Wieck wrote: It is pretty obvious that amost every current system has options to convert from or to mirror a CVS repository. But what if we someday really want to use something else as the master repository? In order to export from CVS into one of the newer systems, there's a lot of work involved. A typical problem is matching up all the commits that happened at one particular timestamp and grouping them into a changeset. Once you've crossed that hurdle, moving between newer tools is a lot easier. Check out Tailor as an example for something that converts changesets in between all the major tools: http://wiki.darcs.net/DarcsWiki/Tailor It should be much easier to run multiple types of repositories all in parallel once CVS isn't one of them. And there will be more options for easily moving to yet another system if the first choice proves wanting after a while. -- * Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Fwd: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Feb 9, 2008 4:58 PM, Jan Wieck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wonder if the efforts to provide mirrors for many different systems can hurt later down the road. It is pretty obvious that amost every current system has options to convert from or to mirror a CVS repository. But what if we someday really want to use something else as the master repository? Are we ready to accept losing unsupported mirrors at that time, or will that actually influence the choice (I think that it should not ... but I can hear the outcry already). The primary reason for a hue and cry to happen would require several prerequisites: 0. An SCM would be chosen to replace CVS. Let us identify it as SCM1 1. The ones hueing and crying would have chosen an SCM, SCM2, that was different from SCM1, and, furthermore, one where there isn't any tailor[1] available to permit translation of patches between them. (I'm not sure that any of the options that people are thinking about *aren't* on tailor's supported list...) 2. There is a further requirement for this lead to a hue and cry that needs to be listened to, namely that some complex and non-migratable processes have been set up that depend on SCM2. I think we can avoid this by declaring up front that its a Really Dumb Idea to set up complex processes that depend on a particular alternative SCM without the nice big fat caveat that The PGDG has not committed to migrating to any particular SCM at this time. Depend on such at your peril! [1] Tailor http://progetti.arstecnica.it/tailor is a tool to migrate changesets between ArX, Bazaar, Bazaar-NG, CVS, Codeville, Darcs, Git, Mercurial, Monotone, Perforce, Subversion and Tla repositories. It's two-way for a number of them... -- http://linuxfinances.info/info/linuxdistributions.html The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. -- assortedly attributed to Albert Einstein, Benjamin Franklin, Rita Mae Brown, and Rudyard Kipling ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Gregory Stark wrote: Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Therefore, we can provide mirrors of the CVS repository in multiple formats. And those mirrors exist already, I remember a GIT and a Subversion mirror off the top of my head, and I bet there's others. After we have that, the master version control system used doesn't matter for developers (except committers), as everyone can choose to use whichever mirror he wants. The patches submitted to pgsql-patches will look exactly the same regardless of the version control system the patch submitter used to check out the source code. I don't think that's right. Developers care about more than just looking at individual commits of individual files. If I have a development version to which I've applied a bunch of pending patches, then fix some of them I want to be able to generate updated versions of those patches. I also want to be able to take updated versions of the patches without having to manually roll back the old versions. Doesn't those capabilities depend only on the version control system you're using, not on the one used in the master repository. And most importantly I need to be able to take the eventually committed version. I've never found that to be a problem. When my patch gets committed, I sometimes do a diff between my patch and the one that was committed to see what was changed, but after that i just do fresh checkout. Perhaps your patches are committed more often than mine? ;-) If it's coming from a mirror of a CVS repository then there's no information of which patch the committer is actually committing or even anything linking the commits to the various files together. That's not true. At least in the git mirror, the conversion programs group together commits to different files, so that they form a single commit in the git repository. Since CVS doesn't have that information explicitly, it's done by matching commit messages and the commit timestamp. It seems to work just fine. subversion would allow committers to keep going as they are with a number of CVS problems eliminated (such as thou shalt not rename files). Now that is certainly true. git or its ilk would impact the lives of submitters and reviewers most. Basically it would allow two non-committers to collaborate, something which we can't really do effectively now. Two git-using non-committers can do that already, regardless of the master repository. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Feb 8, 2008 10:29 PM, Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Am Freitag, 8. Februar 2008 schrieb Markus Bertheau: Maybe the existing SVN, git and other mirrors could just become more official and supported in the sense that users can rely on them to be updated often enough? I think you are right. Some of that is already being worked on. It certainly seems that a lot of people are interested in these services. +1 In particular, if the git repos were officially supported, and best practises for use with Postgres documented, I think a lot more hackers would be comfortable using git to do their work, which is good for collaboration (as mentioned by Greg Stark and Heikki upthread). Seems if we could get some of the advantages of using a modern distributed SCM without the hard sell of changing the central repos, that's worth going for. Cheers BJ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Am Freitag, 8. Februar 2008 schrieb Markus Bertheau: Maybe the existing SVN, git and other mirrors could just become more official and supported in the sense that users can rely on them to be updated often enough? I think you are right. Some of that is already being worked on. It certainly seems that a lot of people are interested in these services. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
2008/2/8, Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Gregory Stark wrote: git or its ilk would impact the lives of submitters and reviewers most. Basically it would allow two non-committers to collaborate, something which we can't really do effectively now. Two git-using non-committers can do that already, regardless of the master repository. Maybe the existing SVN, git and other mirrors could just become more official and supported in the sense that users can rely on them to be updated often enough? At the moment what is there are some links on http://developer.postgresql.org/index.php/Working_with_CVS#Other_versions_of_the_PostgreSQL_Repositoryand no indication of how reliable these repositories are. I suppos that a lot of reason for discussion would disappear if these repositories were made official and supported. Markus
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Friday 08 February 2008 00:52:04 Gregory Stark wrote: Well not really. Our current model is that only stuff that's ready for widespread use goes into CVS. That means everything isn't open and shared at all. everything is mostly sitting on people's local hard drives where you can't use do anything with it, let alone contribute. The patches mailing list is basically our poor-man's distributed SCM today. It's awful since a) you never know if you're looking at the most recent version b) updating your tree from an old version to a newer version is painful c) people only release versions when they think they have something to say or a question; they don't know you want to try out their stuff until you complain about last month's silly bugs d) you never know what version of the tree the patch was against and of course e) if you make any changes they have all the same problems dealing with your changes to their patch. And it's hardly any more centralized than a distributed SCM system would be. One of the things I would like to see in the project is more modularisation during development . In particular, it may be useful to allow different maintainers to look after different parts of the backend, much in the way that different linux kernel developers are in charge of different subsystems. This strikes me as being advantageous in a couple of ways: i) It lowers the bar for entry into the project. Knowing the ins and outs of one subsystem is going to take a developer much less time than it does to learn about the entire backend. ii) Some of the larger patches we have seen during 8.3 would be broken into smaller chunks based upon the part of the backend they touch; so reviewing 3 or 4 smaller incremental patches across 3 or 4 people will take much less time than having to wait for someone like Alvaro or Tom to review and commit several hundred KB of code. This seems to fit more with the idea of a distributed SCM, although it wouldn't be entirely out of the question to set up permissions using CVS/SVN. ATB, Mark. -- Mark Cave-Ayland Sirius Corporation - The Open Source Experts http://www.siriusit.co.uk T: +44 870 608 0063 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
The Git repo certainly is an incremental update. If you ever see a rewind (non-fastforward) of the the repo.or.cz PostgreSQL repo, please let me know... a. * Florian Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080208 07:50]: I've tried with both the SVN and the GIT mirror. Things worked well initialled, but in *both* cases pulling changes from the mirror stopped working after a few weeks or so. It seems that both of these mirrors create the SVN/GIT repo from scratch every time they are updated, instead of incrementally pulling the changes from CVS. Since the mapping of CVS updates to changesets is based on heuristics, the mapping can change for recent commits upon recreation of the mirror. This confuses both the GIT and the SVN client, and svn update (or git pull) stops working :-(. For GIT, I've found a workaround - I've hacked together a script which uses git-cherry and git-cherry-pick to find changesets on the GIT mirror which are not in my local tree. Is there any chance that these mirrors can be updated in a way that doesn't change the past? -- Aidan Van Dyk Create like a god, [EMAIL PROTECTED] command like a king, http://www.highrise.ca/ work like a slave. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 10:25:33 -0500 Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, the SVN mirror in commandprompt.com is recreated from scratch every time. This sucks, we know -- I think it's on Joshua's list to change it to update incrementally. Can you document what you actually do on the developers' wiki? Which? What we are doing now? Sure, it's pretty dumb simple though. I am looking at tailor which in theory should allow us to have incremental updates. Joshua D. Drake -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Andrew Dunstan escribió: Alvaro Herrera wrote: Florian Pflug escribió: Yeah, the SVN mirror in commandprompt.com is recreated from scratch every time. This sucks, we know -- I think it's on Joshua's list to change it to update incrementally. Can you document what you actually do on the developers' wiki? I'd prefer we do not advertise it until it's actually usable. -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Tom Lane wrote: Dimitri Fontaine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Le Wednesday 06 February 2008 21:35:54 Peter Eisentraut, vous avez écrit : Yes, I feel we could use a group writeable patch queue of some sort. Perhaps an IMAP server setup could do the job. I've read some developers appreciating the way review board works: http://review-board.org/ http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/ http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/wiki/UserBasics Hmm, the info on that last page might be out of date, but what it says is that the only SCMS they really support 100% is SVN. The other ones they claim support for don't work [well/at all] with the post-review tool. Btw, wasnt a group already playing with Trac/svn? This one also has something like above: http://trac-hacks.org/wiki/PeerReviewPlugin And a lot of more nice features as well as posgres backend support :) Greets Tino ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Alvaro Herrera wrote: Florian Pflug escribió: I've tried with both the SVN and the GIT mirror. Things worked well initialled, but in *both* cases pulling changes from the mirror stopped working after a few weeks or so. It seems that both of these mirrors create the SVN/GIT repo from scratch every time they are updated, instead of incrementally pulling the changes from CVS. Yeah, the SVN mirror in commandprompt.com is recreated from scratch every time. This sucks, we know -- I think it's on Joshua's list to change it to update incrementally. Can you document what you actually do on the developers' wiki? cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
* Florian Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080208 09:25]: Aidan Van Dyk wrote: The Git repo certainly is an incremental update. If you ever see a rewind (non-fastforward) of the the repo.or.cz PostgreSQL repo, please let me know... Hm... interesting... I'm pretty sure that the past changed at least once - at least I once got loud complaints from git about being unable to merge because there is no common anchestor, or something like that. Very strange - I don't recall it rewinding ever for me. In fact, I'm pretty sure it *can't* rewind heads, because I *don't* push with -f. I seem the remember that I fixed that manually, and only switched to using git-cherry when it happened again - but that memory could be wrong... Wow, the following scheme seems like an awful workaround for what should be a simple: # fetch any remote CVS commits git fetch # defaults to origin, use whatever remote you prefer # And now let's try and rebase my changes onto CVS HEAD git rebase origin/master # again - use whatever remote/branch you want. edit and fix conflicts/problems git commit git rebase --continue For reference, here is the script I use for fetching changesets ATM -- #Checkout pgsql-head. git-checkout pgsql-head 21 || exit 1 #Pull the latest changesets git-fetch pgsql-upstream-git 21 || exit 1 #Now find all unapplied commits from upstream, #and commit them set -o pipefail nice git-cherry \ pgsql-head \ pgsql-upstream-git/master \ pgsql-upstream-git-lastmerged \ | sed -n 's/^\+ \([A-Fa-f0-9][A-Fa-f0-9]*\)$/\1/p' \ | xargs -n1 --no-run-if-empty \ git-cherry-pick \ 21 \ || exit 1 #Now, update pgsql-upstream-git-lastmerged git tag -f pgsql-upstream-git-lastmerged pgsql-upstream-git/master \ || exit 1 -- regards, Florian Pflug -- Aidan Van Dyk Create like a god, [EMAIL PROTECTED] command like a king, http://www.highrise.ca/ work like a slave. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Aidan Van Dyk wrote: The Git repo certainly is an incremental update. If you ever see a rewind (non-fastforward) of the the repo.or.cz PostgreSQL repo, please let me know... Hm... interesting... I'm pretty sure that the past changed at least once - at least I once got loud complaints from git about being unable to merge because there is no common anchestor, or something like that. I seem the remember that I fixed that manually, and only switched to using git-cherry when it happened again - but that memory could be wrong... For reference, here is the script I use for fetching changesets ATM -- #Checkout pgsql-head. git-checkout pgsql-head 21 || exit 1 #Pull the latest changesets git-fetch pgsql-upstream-git 21 || exit 1 #Now find all unapplied commits from upstream, #and commit them set -o pipefail nice git-cherry \ pgsql-head \ pgsql-upstream-git/master \ pgsql-upstream-git-lastmerged \ | sed -n 's/^\+ \([A-Fa-f0-9][A-Fa-f0-9]*\)$/\1/p' \ | xargs -n1 --no-run-if-empty \ git-cherry-pick \ 21 \ || exit 1 #Now, update pgsql-upstream-git-lastmerged git tag -f pgsql-upstream-git-lastmerged pgsql-upstream-git/master \ || exit 1 -- regards, Florian Pflug ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Am Freitag, 8. Februar 2008 schrieb Brendan Jurd: In particular, if the git repos were officially supported, and best practises for use with Postgres documented, I think a lot more hackers would be comfortable using git to do their work, which is good for collaboration (as mentioned by Greg Stark and Heikki upthread). Well, I didn't want to announce anything before anything existed, but this is precisely what is being worked on. Watch for an announcement in this forum. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Peter Eisentraut wrote: Am Freitag, 8. Februar 2008 schrieb Brendan Jurd: In particular, if the git repos were officially supported, and best practises for use with Postgres documented, I think a lot more hackers would be comfortable using git to do their work, which is good for collaboration (as mentioned by Greg Stark and Heikki upthread). Well, I didn't want to announce anything before anything existed, but this is precisely what is being worked on. Watch for an announcement in this forum. I've tried with both the SVN and the GIT mirror. Things worked well initialled, but in *both* cases pulling changes from the mirror stopped working after a few weeks or so. It seems that both of these mirrors create the SVN/GIT repo from scratch every time they are updated, instead of incrementally pulling the changes from CVS. Since the mapping of CVS updates to changesets is based on heuristics, the mapping can change for recent commits upon recreation of the mirror. This confuses both the GIT and the SVN client, and svn update (or git pull) stops working :-(. For GIT, I've found a workaround - I've hacked together a script which uses git-cherry and git-cherry-pick to find changesets on the GIT mirror which are not in my local tree. Is there any chance that these mirrors can be updated in a way that doesn't change the past? regards, Florian Pflug ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Florian Pflug escribió: I've tried with both the SVN and the GIT mirror. Things worked well initialled, but in *both* cases pulling changes from the mirror stopped working after a few weeks or so. It seems that both of these mirrors create the SVN/GIT repo from scratch every time they are updated, instead of incrementally pulling the changes from CVS. Yeah, the SVN mirror in commandprompt.com is recreated from scratch every time. This sucks, we know -- I think it's on Joshua's list to change it to update incrementally. -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 06:50:34PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Dimitri Fontaine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Le Wednesday 06 February 2008 21:35:54 Peter Eisentraut, vous avez �crit�: Yes, I feel we could use a group writeable patch queue of some sort. Perhaps an IMAP server setup could do the job. I've read some developers appreciating the way review board works: http://review-board.org/ http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/ http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/wiki/UserBasics Hmm, the info on that last page might be out of date, but what it says is that the only SCMS they really support 100% is SVN. The other ones they claim support for don't work [well/at all] with the post-review tool. Not having looked into exactly how it works and if it's something we want, but if we want to, any reason we can't just point it at the svn mirror? Plus, I see something on their blog saying taht they do support cvs as long as it's pserver. So perhaps part of the docs aren't up-to-date... It looks interesting though, and would alleviate a few of the problems people have mentioned with reviewing stuff that's posted as diffs. Has anyone here got any direct experience with it? Can't say I do. But even if nobody does, maybe we should just set it up and test? I'd be particularly interested to see how it actually interacts with email. From a quick reading, you have to do all the discussion on the web and it can dump them out to a list. But not read in a discussion from a list. //Magnus ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Le jeudi 07 février 2008, Tom Lane a écrit : Hmm, the info on that last page might be out of date, but what it says is that the only SCMS they really support 100% is SVN. The other ones they claim support for don't work [well/at all] with the post-review tool. Maybe this is all to naive to ever work, but I'm thinking a diff extracted from SVN looks perfectly equivalent to a diff extracted from CVS. And svn diff output should be usable the same way any -patches diff? It also seems to me that when a patch is applied, still pending patches may have to get adapted to new head before they can be reviewed. So, what if a SVN copy of CVS HEAD was used for review-board, and automatically updated from CVS HEAD. The diff which won't get cleanly applied after an automatic SVN update would not apply cleanly against CVS HEAD neither, so will have to get adapted with or without the SVN mirror step. If all of this can be made automatic, short of hosting facility service administration, what's still blocking? It looks interesting though, and would alleviate a few of the problems people have mentioned with reviewing stuff that's posted as diffs. And maybe it would ease Bruce's pressure to organize the queues and allow all participants to easily follow what's happening with the patches, without having to digest all -hackers mail and without manual big-table wiki page editing. Is it only a dream? :) Regards, -- dim signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Magnus Hagander wrote: On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 06:50:34PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Dimitri Fontaine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Le Wednesday 06 February 2008 21:35:54 Peter Eisentraut, vous avez �crit�: Yes, I feel we could use a group writeable patch queue of some sort. Perhaps an IMAP server setup could do the job. I've read some developers appreciating the way review board works: http://review-board.org/ http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/ http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/wiki/UserBasics Hmm, the info on that last page might be out of date, but what it says is that the only SCMS they really support 100% is SVN. The other ones they claim support for don't work [well/at all] with the post-review tool. Not having looked into exactly how it works and if it's something we want, but if we want to, any reason we can't just point it at the svn mirror? Plus, I see something on their blog saying taht they do support cvs as long as it's pserver. So perhaps part of the docs aren't up-to-date... It looks interesting though, and would alleviate a few of the problems people have mentioned with reviewing stuff that's posted as diffs. Has anyone here got any direct experience with it? Can't say I do. But even if nobody does, maybe we should just set it up and test? I'd be particularly interested to see how it actually interacts with email. From a quick reading, you have to do all the discussion on the web and it can dump them out to a list. But not read in a discussion from a list. I could do a demo install on the trackerdemo jail - that one seems to have most of the prequisits and would not need work to get going. Not sure I want to install MySQL there though - so we would have to go with the sqlite backend for the test ;-) Stefan ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: I could do a demo install on the trackerdemo jail - that one seems to have most of the prequisits and would not need work to get going. Not sure I want to install MySQL there though - so we would have to go with the sqlite backend for the test ;-) Umm, we need to eat our own dog food. If it won't run on postgres then fuggedaboudit. The settings_local.py.tmpl contains these two lines: # Database backend. Any supported django database engine should work. DATABASE_ENGINE = 'mysql' # 'postgresql', 'mysql', 'sqlite3' or 'ado_mssql'. So let's just go with postgresql ;-) cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: I could do a demo install on the trackerdemo jail - that one seems to have most of the prequisits and would not need work to get going. Not sure I want to install MySQL there though - so we would have to go with the sqlite backend for the test ;-) Umm, we need to eat our own dog food. If it won't run on postgres then fuggedaboudit. yep The settings_local.py.tmpl contains these two lines: # Database backend. Any supported django database engine should work. DATABASE_ENGINE = 'mysql' # 'postgresql', 'mysql', 'sqlite3' or 'ado_mssql'. So let's just go with postgresql ;-) yeah various parts of their docs state that only sqlite and mysql are support some others say that only those are tested ... I will take a stab at it later today anyway. Stefan ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 11:19:26 -0500 Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 06:50:34PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Hmm, the info on that last page might be out of date, but what it says is that the only SCMS they really support 100% is SVN. The other ones they claim support for don't work [well/at all] with the post-review tool. Not having looked into exactly how it works and if it's something we want, but if we want to, any reason we can't just point it at the svn mirror? Synchronization problems scare me. That's reasonable. Although I am currently reviewing tailor which can supposedly incrementally update the repo versus bulk convert each time. The point I tried to make earlier was that if we actually started to rely on such a tool, we'd want to fix it to talk to CVS. Hey, it's an open source project, right? Yes but we are supposed to work smart not hard. CVS doesn't fit that criteria when we have highly available, highly used and highly trusted options available. We even have an option with an extremely low barrier of entry (svn) and options that are proven amongst one of the (if not the) most active FOSS projects on the planet (git). I am not arguing any particular solution but home brewing a solution so people can stay on what is definitely a dying SCM is dumb. There are so many tools available to us that we *don't* have to modify, bend, break or if you like, improve that any argument outside of, We are used to CVS is just hand waving and that argument is sad. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Josh, Try it out. Setup a review-board installation, point it at your SVN mirror. As long as people can post diffs (and from the the screenshots, it looks like it has a diff file browse button), it doesnt' really matter what it uses as it's backend, does it? And if it turns out to be a good means for discussion patches, or at lease recording patches and status, then good. And the nice thing is that it could even be managed by observers at first, much like the wiki patch status page was until it's been shown (if it is) to be a good tool for tracking patches, etc. I'm slightly wary of it, but that's probably just because my normal development work-flow *doesn't* include a web-browser for anything, and being forced to use some AJAXy web-interface to do/see anything probably means I won't do/see anything... Thankfully, my absence in the development process isn't something that the PostgreSQL community will greatly miss... a. * Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080207 11:46]: The point I tried to make earlier was that if we actually started to rely on such a tool, we'd want to fix it to talk to CVS. Hey, it's an open source project, right? Yes but we are supposed to work smart not hard. CVS doesn't fit that criteria when we have highly available, highly used and highly trusted options available. We even have an option with an extremely low barrier of entry (svn) and options that are proven amongst one of the (if not the) most active FOSS projects on the planet (git). I am not arguing any particular solution but home brewing a solution so people can stay on what is definitely a dying SCM is dumb. There are so many tools available to us that we *don't* have to modify, bend, break or if you like, improve that any argument outside of, We are used to CVS is just hand waving and that argument is sad. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit -- Aidan Van Dyk Create like a god, [EMAIL PROTECTED] command like a king, http://www.highrise.ca/ work like a slave. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I repeat. I am not arguing a particular solution. I am arguing against creating more internal infrastructure and the relevant support requirements when other solutions exist. Who said anything about internal infrastructure? We'd be helping another open source project flesh out and test a possibly-incomplete area of their code, not undertaking a fork. (Now, if they rejected patches on the grounds that they don't care about CVS, then this doesn't work, but I can't imagine they would; they do have partial support for it.) Now, switching to some other SCM might indeed create some new support requirements. I was a bit surprised to read this on another mailing list yesterday: From a relative time to install from source standpoint it looks like this: CVS- 10 minutes (no external dependencies) GIT- 8 minutes (no external dependencies) Mercurial - 1 minute (depends on Python) Subversion - 4-6 hours (depends on a multitude of packages and will only work with specific versions which you learn about the hard way at build time). For those on platforms where SVN comes prepackaged, this might not be a big problem (except maybe for pulling in packages they don't want). For other developers this kind of thing could be a showstopper. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Tom Lane wrote: From a relative time to install from source standpoint it looks like this: CVS- 10 minutes (no external dependencies) GIT- 8 minutes (no external dependencies) Mercurial - 1 minute (depends on Python) Subversion - 4-6 hours (depends on a multitude of packages and will only work with specific versions which you learn about the hard way at build time). For those on platforms where SVN comes prepackaged, this might not be a big problem (except maybe for pulling in packages they don't want). For other developers this kind of thing could be a showstopper As with anything you are likely to see on this issue, the above seems highly suspect as hard numbers. In my own case I believe installing Subversion is in the 10 minute time frame as well unless you get into linking it with Apache and such which becomes unfair. Setting up any of these solutions to be securely accessible from the network takes longer than 10 minutes, so the numbers listed can only be for local installs, and not all systems have Python. I think think Solaris 8 does? In terms of picking an SCM candidate, I don't think time to install from source is a legitimate concern. Installing from source is great, but if the package needs to be installed from source, it is not well enough supported by the community to be worth using. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: {**Spam**} Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Dimitri Fontaine wrote: Le Thursday 07 February 2008 17:19:26 Tom Lane, vous avez écrit : Not having looked into exactly how it works and if it's something we want, but if we want to, any reason we can't just point it at the svn mirror? Synchronization problems scare me. AIUI we're talking about one way synchronization (from CVS to SVN) only, and that's considering review-board is not able to do CVS directly (which seems wrong). yes - CVS works just fine The quick doc reading I've made showed a read-only tool at the SCM side --- the accepted patch won't get commited for you by the tool. this seems to be true too from what I see on the test-install The point I tried to make earlier was that if we actually started to rely on such a tool, we'd want to fix it to talk to CVS. Others are pointing it does in fact talk to CVS even if the documentation about this is... to be written. well CVS is a simply as selecting CVS in the admin interface and seems to be the only scm that it works without installing additional python libraries :-) Stefan ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: {**Spam**} Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Le Thursday 07 February 2008 17:19:26 Tom Lane, vous avez écrit : Not having looked into exactly how it works and if it's something we want, but if we want to, any reason we can't just point it at the svn mirror? Synchronization problems scare me. AIUI we're talking about one way synchronization (from CVS to SVN) only, and that's considering review-board is not able to do CVS directly (which seems wrong). The quick doc reading I've made showed a read-only tool at the SCM side --- the accepted patch won't get commited for you by the tool. The point I tried to make earlier was that if we actually started to rely on such a tool, we'd want to fix it to talk to CVS. Others are pointing it does in fact talk to CVS even if the documentation about this is... to be written. Regards, -- dim signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Mark Mielke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In terms of picking an SCM candidate, I don't think time to install from source is a legitimate concern. Installing from source is great, but if the package needs to be installed from source, it is not well enough supported by the community to be worth using. That is 100.0% wrong. Some people want to install from source, and some don't have any choice because they are on platforms where there's not a prebuilt binary available. I am *not* willing to say that we will blow off developers on any platform that some other project is choosing not to provide binaries for. As a fairly well related example, note how CVSup never became the de facto standard, because it wasn't portable enough, or at least had made the wrong decisions about what to depend on. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 14:00:33 -0300 Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joshua D. Drake escribió: I am not arguing any particular solution but home brewing a solution so people can stay on what is definitely a dying SCM is dumb. There are so many tools available to us that we *don't* have to modify, bend, break or if you like, improve that any argument outside of, We are used to CVS is just hand waving and that argument is sad. Actually, in using Subversion I've found it broken enough that a migration to it does not offer that much of an advantage over staying with CVS. I repeat. I am not arguing a particular solution. I am arguing against creating more internal infrastructure and the relevant support requirements when other solutions exist. Joshua D. Drake -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Therefore, we can provide mirrors of the CVS repository in multiple formats. And those mirrors exist already, I remember a GIT and a Subversion mirror off the top of my head, and I bet there's others. After we have that, the master version control system used doesn't matter for developers (except committers), as everyone can choose to use whichever mirror he wants. The patches submitted to pgsql-patches will look exactly the same regardless of the version control system the patch submitter used to check out the source code. I don't think that's right. Developers care about more than just looking at individual commits of individual files. If I have a development version to which I've applied a bunch of pending patches, then fix some of them I want to be able to generate updated versions of those patches. I also want to be able to take updated versions of the patches without having to manually roll back the old versions. And most importantly I need to be able to take the eventually committed version. If it's coming from a mirror of a CVS repository then there's no information of which patch the committer is actually committing or even anything linking the commits to the various files together. subversion would allow committers to keep going as they are with a number of CVS problems eliminated (such as thou shalt not rename files). git or its ilk would impact the lives of submitters and reviewers most. Basically it would allow two non-committers to collaborate, something which we can't really do effectively now. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostGIS support! ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Joshua D. Drake wrote: On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 14:00:33 -0300 Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joshua D. Drake escribió: I am not arguing any particular solution but home brewing a solution so people can stay on what is definitely a dying SCM is dumb. There are so many tools available to us that we *don't* have to modify, bend, break or if you like, improve that any argument outside of, We are used to CVS is just hand waving and that argument is sad. Actually, in using Subversion I've found it broken enough that a migration to it does not offer that much of an advantage over staying with CVS. I repeat. I am not arguing a particular solution. I am arguing against creating more internal infrastructure and the relevant support requirements when other solutions exist. Just so we can stop talking about this, it does seem it works with CVS - it's just not necessarily documented that way... //Magnus ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Feb 7, 2008 9:42 PM, Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gregory Stark escribió: For what it's worth I think GIT is a better fit for our needs. Perhaps it would be, if it worked on Windows ... Not that I care, but I bet Magnus would. http://code.google.com/p/msysgit/ Unfortunately, Git on Windows is only officially supported using Cygwin. However, there is a fork (currently in the process of being merged with official git) which enables you to compile git using MinGW/MSys. This project aims to make installing this port easy. I just installed MSys/Git; seems to work... Evidently this fork is bearing fruit... -- http://linuxfinances.info/info/linuxdistributions.html The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. -- assortedly attributed to Albert Einstein, Benjamin Franklin, Rita Mae Brown, and Rudyard Kipling ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Tom Lane wrote: Mark Mielke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In terms of picking an SCM candidate, I don't think time to install from source is a legitimate concern. Installing from source is great, but if the package needs to be installed from source, it is not well enough supported by the community to be worth using. That is 100.0% wrong. Some people want to install from source, and some don't have any choice because they are on platforms where there's not a prebuilt binary available. I am *not* willing to say that we will blow off developers on any platform that some other project is choosing not to provide binaries for. As a fairly well related example, note how CVSup never became the de facto standard, because it wasn't portable enough, or at least had made the wrong decisions about what to depend on You are not correct. Different SCM systems have different capabilities. Value and portability are important factors. Time to install from source is not. Comparing how easy they are to install from source in terms of minutes is not a fair assessment of the value they provide nor the portability of the systems. The numbers you quoted are obviously invalid as SVN is based very significantly on the APR libraries that Apache is based on in a well established and successful effort to provide portability. Would you say that Apache is not a good choice? None of this proves that SVN is a good choice - but I believe it does prove that using numbers such as you quoted to draw a conclusion about what is best for PostgreSQL is a backwards way of thinking about the problem. GIT is currently poor at portability primarily because it is new, and if you tried to compile it on Windows (a common platform these days) without CYGWIN you would have a lot of trouble. This does not make GIT a worse choice. That it lacks in portability is a current concern that should be weighed along with the rest of the issues such as ease of use, productivity, integration with other valuable tools, parallel development support (reliable merge tracking being a major factor here), and offline capabilities. I think what you missed was my statement that if package installs do not exist for the majority of the platforms you intend people to develop PostgreSQL on, then the SCM system you are considering is not mature or enough, or supported well enough by the community, to be a good candidate and there will be trouble down the road if the system that is chosen goes into disrepair. Being able to compile from source is a virtue shared by open source developers - but a requirement that it must be compiled from source is not a virtue. If it must be compiled from source, it means the product is not valuable enough to people to create a demand for a binary install package. Nobody should be forced to compile an SCM system from source in order to contribute to PostgreSQL. That would be just silly. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Alvaro Herrera wrote: Stefan Kaltenbrunner escribió: yeah - the test install is available on http://reviewdemo.postgresql.org if people want to test judge for themself - contact magnus or me if you need permissions to do/test stuff there. Thanks. I tried submitting a review request against anoncvs but it failed with No valid separator after the filename was found in the diff header patch can apply the patch correctly -- I'm not sure what does this patch have that RB does not like. The patch is attached in case you want to play with it. If I'm not mistaken, I read somewhere in the docs that the diff has to be unified, not context. Could that be it? //Magnus ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mark Mielke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In terms of picking an SCM candidate, I don't think time to install from source is a legitimate concern. Installing from source is great, but if the package needs to be installed from source, it is not well enough supported by the community to be worth using. That is 100.0% wrong. Some people want to install from source, and some don't have any choice because they are on platforms where there's not a prebuilt binary available. I am *not* willing to say that we will blow off developers on any platform that some other project is choosing not to provide binaries for. I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing. I've never heard any complaints about building svn from source before for *developers*. I think that's just as easy as anything else. What I have heard in the distance past is that it was difficult to set up a server. That isn't something developers would have to do. And in any case I understood that to be mostly about how it used to depend on a web server which is no longer true anyways. As a fairly well related example, note how CVSup never became the de facto standard, because it wasn't portable enough, or at least had made the wrong decisions about what to depend on. This is all predicated on a bit of ridiculous FUD. Apply the logic in reverse and it should be obvious. Subversion is a mature package being used by thousands of open source projects. At this point I would hazard it's more widely used than CVS amongst open source projects. Therefore it *doesn't* have any poor choices of dependencies. For what it's worth I think GIT is a better fit for our needs. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication support! ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Stefan Kaltenbrunner escribió:
yeah - the test install is available on http://reviewdemo.postgresql.org
if people want to test judge for themself - contact magnus or me if you
need permissions to do/test stuff there.
Thanks. I tried submitting a review request against anoncvs but it
failed with
No valid separator after the filename was found in the diff header
patch can apply the patch correctly -- I'm not sure what does this
patch have that RB does not like.
The patch is attached in case you want to play with it.
--
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
Index: src/backend/commands/analyze.c
===
RCS file: /home/alvherre/Code/cvs/pgsql/src/backend/commands/analyze.c,v
retrieving revision 1.114
diff -c -p -r1.114 analyze.c
*** src/backend/commands/analyze.c 3 Jan 2008 21:23:15 - 1.114
--- src/backend/commands/analyze.c 15 Jan 2008 22:50:24 -
***
*** 22,27
--- 22,28
#include catalog/index.h
#include catalog/indexing.h
#include catalog/namespace.h
+ #include catalog/pg_namespace.h
#include commands/dbcommands.h
#include commands/vacuum.h
#include executor/executor.h
*** analyze_rel(Oid relid, VacuumStmt *vacst
*** 161,169
{
/* No need for a WARNING if we already complained during VACUUM */
if (!vacstmt-vacuum)
! ereport(WARNING,
! (errmsg(skipping \%s\ --- only table or database owner can analyze it,
! RelationGetRelationName(onerel;
relation_close(onerel, ShareUpdateExclusiveLock);
return;
}
--- 162,181
{
/* No need for a WARNING if we already complained during VACUUM */
if (!vacstmt-vacuum)
! {
! if (onerel-rd_rel-relisshared)
! ereport(WARNING,
! (errmsg(skipping \%s\ --- only superuser can analyze it,
! RelationGetRelationName(onerel;
! else if (onerel-rd_rel-relnamespace == PG_CATALOG_NAMESPACE)
! ereport(WARNING,
! (errmsg(skipping \%s\ --- only superuser or database owner can analyze it,
! RelationGetRelationName(onerel;
! else
! ereport(WARNING,
! (errmsg(skipping \%s\ --- only table or database owner can analyze it,
! RelationGetRelationName(onerel;
! }
relation_close(onerel, ShareUpdateExclusiveLock);
return;
}
Index: src/backend/commands/vacuum.c
===
RCS file: /home/alvherre/Code/cvs/pgsql/src/backend/commands/vacuum.c,v
retrieving revision 1.363
diff -c -p -r1.363 vacuum.c
*** src/backend/commands/vacuum.c 3 Jan 2008 21:23:15 - 1.363
--- src/backend/commands/vacuum.c 15 Jan 2008 22:50:01 -
***
*** 30,35
--- 30,36
#include access/xlog.h
#include catalog/namespace.h
#include catalog/pg_database.h
+ #include catalog/pg_namespace.h
#include commands/dbcommands.h
#include commands/vacuum.h
#include executor/executor.h
*** vacuum_rel(Oid relid, VacuumStmt *vacstm
*** 1048,1056
if (!(pg_class_ownercheck(RelationGetRelid(onerel), GetUserId()) ||
(pg_database_ownercheck(MyDatabaseId, GetUserId()) !onerel-rd_rel-relisshared)))
{
! ereport(WARNING,
! (errmsg(skipping \%s\ --- only table or database owner can vacuum it,
! RelationGetRelationName(onerel;
relation_close(onerel, lmode);
CommitTransactionCommand();
return;
--- 1049,1066
if (!(pg_class_ownercheck(RelationGetRelid(onerel), GetUserId()) ||
(pg_database_ownercheck(MyDatabaseId, GetUserId()) !onerel-rd_rel-relisshared)))
{
! if (onerel-rd_rel-relisshared)
! ereport(WARNING,
! (errmsg(skipping \%s\ --- only superuser can vacuum it,
! RelationGetRelationName(onerel;
! else if (onerel-rd_rel-relnamespace == PG_CATALOG_NAMESPACE)
! ereport(WARNING,
! (errmsg(skipping \%s\ --- only superuser or database owner can vacuum it,
! RelationGetRelationName(onerel;
! else
! ereport(WARNING,
! (errmsg(skipping \%s\ --- only table or database owner can vacuum it,
! RelationGetRelationName(onerel;
relation_close(onerel, lmode);
CommitTransactionCommand();
return;
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Joshua D. Drake escribió: I am not arguing any particular solution but home brewing a solution so people can stay on what is definitely a dying SCM is dumb. There are so many tools available to us that we *don't* have to modify, bend, break or if you like, improve that any argument outside of, We are used to CVS is just hand waving and that argument is sad. Actually, in using Subversion I've found it broken enough that a migration to it does not offer that much of an advantage over staying with CVS. It would certainly offer us some advantages, but our usage of CVS has proven successful. Moreover, several developers have started using the DSCM of their choice on top of our CVS repo, which gives a lot of the benefits without the hassle of forcing everyone else to convert. I say we should try Review Board with CVS. If it doesn't work, make sure it gets fixed. -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 06:50:34PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Hmm, the info on that last page might be out of date, but what it says is that the only SCMS they really support 100% is SVN. The other ones they claim support for don't work [well/at all] with the post-review tool. Not having looked into exactly how it works and if it's something we want, but if we want to, any reason we can't just point it at the svn mirror? Synchronization problems scare me. The point I tried to make earlier was that if we actually started to rely on such a tool, we'd want to fix it to talk to CVS. Hey, it's an open source project, right? regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Alvaro Herrera wrote: Gregory Stark escribió: For what it's worth I think GIT is a better fit for our needs. Perhaps it would be, if it worked on Windows ... Not that I care, but I bet Magnus would. There's fairly good tools to convert from one version control system to another. Especially: from CVS to others. And it can be done in an incremental fashion. Therefore, we can provide mirrors of the CVS repository in multiple formats. And those mirrors exist already, I remember a GIT and a Subversion mirror off the top of my head, and I bet there's others. After we have that, the master version control system used doesn't matter for developers (except committers), as everyone can choose to use whichever mirror he wants. The patches submitted to pgsql-patches will look exactly the same regardless of the version control system the patch submitter used to check out the source code. We can agree to disagree. No need for the project to switch. Personally, I've been playing with GIT recently, and it does feel quite nice. The mirror seems to be missing all tags, but other than that, I've been happy with it. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Mark Mielke wrote: Perhaps he didn't read the instructions. See below for a 5 minutes 34 elapsed time. This includes extracting SVN over the network using SVN. And just to be complete, here is git at 2 minutes 13 seconds. Not that these times matter at all, but in case anybody thinks they do... $ time zsh $ cd /stage/mark $ wget http://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/git-1.5.4.tar.bz2 ... 16:56:41 (450.83 KB/s) - `git-1.5.4.tar.bz2' saved [1583166/1583166] $ tar xfj git-1.5.4.tar.bz2 $ cd git-1.5.4 $ su Password: [EMAIL PROTECTED]/stage/mark/git-1.5.4# mkdir /opt/git-1.5.4 [EMAIL PROTECTED]/stage/mark/git-1.5.4# chown mark:mark /opt/git-1.5.4 [EMAIL PROTECTED]/stage/mark/git-1.5.4# exit $ ./configure --prefix=/opt/git-1.5.4 ... $ make -j4 ... $ make install ... $ /opt/git-1.5.4/bin/git version git version 1.5.4 $ exit zsh 63.61s user 12.94s system 57% cpu 2:13.77 total -- Mark Mielke [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Dear Mark,
I encourage all to keep their minds open.
Good:-)
My 0.02 EUR (or even less) on the recurrent SCM flame war on the list.
ISTM that a decentralized or distributed SCM for PostgreSQL would be a bad
move, however great it would be at branching and merging. For me it is a
philosophy question: if PGSQL is a common work, then everything should
be open and shared, and a centralized systems make sense to embodied this.
Even if one can publish one's branch easily with GIT, it's not the same,
because it is still a personnal branch somehow.
From WordNet (r) 3.0 (2006) [wn]:
git
n 1: a person who is deemed to be despicable or contemptible;
only a rotter would do that; kill the rat; throw the
bum out; you cowardly little pukes!; the British call a
contemptible person a `git' [syn: {rotter}, {dirty dog},
{rat}, {skunk}, {stinker}, {stinkpot}, {bum}, {puke},
{crumb}, {lowlife}, {scum bag}, {so-and-so}, {git}]
I'm not sure I would be proud to use such a stupidly named tool for a
common work. I really do not share Linus humor, and apparent contempt
for other people. GIT implements I want to chose whom I work with, and
don't care about the others, and don't ever want to have to look at their
ugly patches, or at least it is what I understood from his talk at Google
last year. Would this be the future spirit of PG devel? I hope not.
--
Fabien.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Tom Lane wrote: Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing. I've never heard any complaints about building svn from source before for *developers*. I think that's just as easy as anything else. [ shrug... ] The message I quoted was from Bob Friesenhahn, who is certainly a competent C programmer. If it took him half a day to install SVN from scratch, I'm prepared to believe it's not trivial. At the very least, I suggest you replicate the experiment before asserting you know more about it than someone who's tried. Perhaps he didn't read the instructions. See below for a 5 minutes 34 elapsed time. This includes extracting SVN over the network using SVN. Cheers, mark $ time zsh $ svn checkout http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk svn-devel ... Checked out revision 29228. $ cd svn-devel $ ./autogen.sh ... You can run ./configure now. ... $ su Password: [EMAIL PROTECTED]/stage/mark/svn-devel# mkdir /opt/svn-devel [EMAIL PROTECTED]/stage/mark/svn-devel# chown mark:mark /opt/svn-devel [EMAIL PROTECTED]/stage/mark/svn-devel# exit $ ./configure --prefix=/opt/svn-devel configure: Configuring Subversion 1.6.0 ... $ make -j4 ... $ make install ... $ /opt/svn-devel/bin/svn --version svn, version 1.6.0 (dev build) compiled Feb 7 2008, 16:46:21 Copyright (C) 2000-2008 CollabNet. Subversion is open source software, see http://subversion.tigris.org/ This product includes software developed by CollabNet (http://www.Collab.Net/). The following repository access (RA) modules are available: * ra_svn : Module for accessing a repository using the svn network protocol. - handles 'svn' scheme * ra_local : Module for accessing a repository on local disk. - handles 'file' scheme $ exit zsh 179.01s user 67.59s system 73% cpu 5:33.51 total -- Mark Mielke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Feb 7, 2008 9:23 PM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At the very least, I suggest you replicate the experiment before asserting you know more about it than someone who's tried. Will you accept the testimony of someone who has built an SVN *server* entirely from source on Slackware Linux? It took about an hour the first time I did it, with no previous SVN experience. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Oracle-compatible database company ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Tom Lane wrote: Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing. I've never heard any complaints about building svn from source before for *developers*. I think that's just as easy as anything else. [ shrug... ] The message I quoted was from Bob Friesenhahn, who is certainly a competent C programmer. If it took him half a day to install SVN from scratch, I'm prepared to believe it's not trivial. At the very least, I suggest you replicate the experiment before asserting you know more about it than someone who's tried. I've built it from source several times, and it's certainly not taken half a day. It took quite a while to build, but it wasn't hard to do at all. Goes to replicate the experiment, not to argue for or against any of the products. //Magnus ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Tom Lane wrote: Subversion - 4-6 hours (depends on a multitude of packages and will only work with specific versions which you learn about the hard way at build time). I have seen one of these nightmare Subversion installs before so I can attest to the fact that they happen. Was close to two days actually. Hours spent just trying to sort out which version of apr, neon, etc. all worked right. The versions that shipped with the OS were broken, trying to use the whole Subversion dependency bundle introduced which version am I linking with now? issues and even that set wasn't completely consistant. Complete disaster all around. That said, I think that's an exceptional case due to using a Linux distribution that should have been retired already, but dismissing the wild Subversion build dependency tree problem as FUD would be wrong. It happens. For those on platforms where SVN comes prepackaged, this might not be a big problem (except maybe for pulling in packages they don't want). For other developers this kind of thing could be a showstopper. It's only recently that I started getting prepackaged SVN versions that were new enough to be completely useful included with the Linux distributions I use. The only thing that's saved me on RHEL4 are the RPM packages at summersoft.fay.ar.us, and even for those you have to pull down many packages and install them just right. As others have pointed out this is really kind of moot. Subversion is really only a small step forward from CVS and it has merge issues that make it less suitable the larger the number of developers there are. As much as I'd like to move off of CVS, if the forward step is Subversion I'd say why bother; too much work for a small gain. -- * Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Am Donnerstag, 7. Februar 2008 schrieb Tom Lane: So, again, the question is has anyone really used it? Is it the best thing since sliced bread, or not so much? I think it is about the equivalent of replacing a mailing list by Yahoo Groups. It has more special effects, and no doubt some people will like it, but it cannot replace the original. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Joshua D. Drake wrote: On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 14:00:33 -0300 Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joshua D. Drake escribió: I am not arguing any particular solution but home brewing a solution so people can stay on what is definitely a dying SCM is dumb. There are so many tools available to us that we *don't* have to modify, bend, break or if you like, improve that any argument outside of, We are used to CVS is just hand waving and that argument is sad. Actually, in using Subversion I've found it broken enough that a migration to it does not offer that much of an advantage over staying with CVS. I repeat. I am not arguing a particular solution. I am arguing against creating more internal infrastructure and the relevant support requirements when other solutions exist. yep - I just got a prototype install of review board running against anoncvs.postgresql.org and it just seems to work fine at a first glance using CVS (and postgresql for that matter). So no need for any strange workarounds :-) Stefan ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Gregory Stark escribió: For what it's worth I think GIT is a better fit for our needs. Perhaps it would be, if it worked on Windows ... Not that I care, but I bet Magnus would. -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Alvaro Herrera wrote: Gregory Stark escribió: For what it's worth I think GIT is a better fit for our needs. Perhaps it would be, if it worked on Windows ... Not that I care, but I bet Magnus would. To summarize what I care about: I don't really care if I can't *commit* from Windows - I never do that anyway, for fear of breaking line endings. I do care, and a lot, if I can't pull down latest-and-greatest HEAD revision without risk of getting something that's not correct. Which means that if there is a gateway to something that works well, that is *stable and capable of being up to date*, I can live with that. (for example, doing a dump like the current svn mirror does which lags behind a lot, would be something I'd absolutely object to) //Magnus ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Peter Eisentraut wrote: Am Donnerstag, 7. Februar 2008 schrieb Tom Lane: So, again, the question is has anyone really used it? Is it the best thing since sliced bread, or not so much? I think it is about the equivalent of replacing a mailing list by Yahoo Groups. It has more special effects, and no doubt some people will like it, but it cannot replace the original. yeah - the test install is available on http://reviewdemo.postgresql.org if people want to test judge for themself - contact magnus or me if you need permissions to do/test stuff there. Stefan ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
James Mansion [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The curre nt *plan* is for a 14 month cycle. And it will probably slip. Some of the queued items are going to be very old by the time you go to 8.4 on this program, which seems a shame. What? The plan is to deal with them next month (in the first commit fest). The point of what I was saying is that a large fraction of what is in the queue is not committable yet. We are not going to commit it anyway just to get it out of the queue --- what we're going to do is review it and send it back to the authors with suggestions for rework. If they don't get the rework done by November, their patches won't get into 8.4, but that's hardly the fault of the proposed process. As for probably slip, the entire point of this process change is that we're not going to allow schedule slippage as readily as we have in the past. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Fabien COELHO wrote: ISTM that a decentralized or distributed SCM for PostgreSQL would be a bad move, however great it would be at branching and merging. For me it is a philosophy question: if PGSQL is a common work, then everything should be open and shared, and a centralized systems make sense to embodied this. Even if one can publish one's branch easily with GIT, it's not the same, because it is still a personnal branch somehow. I'm not sure I would be proud to use such a stupidly named tool for a common work. I really do not share Linus humor, and apparent contempt for other people. GIT implements I want to chose whom I work with, and don't care about the others, and don't ever want to have to look at their ugly patches, or at least it is what I understood from his talk at Google last year. Would this be the future spirit of PG devel? I hope not. I don't particularly care what it is called or what Linus' intents were. Linus has changed his public face on git several times since its creation, and I think he is playing with people, manipulating them into launching Linux and GIT into open source history. From a political stand point, it's about attracting the right sort of people to donate their time to your project. Different types of honey attract different types of folk. :-) Your points on centralization are ones that I mostly agree with and share. I think it depends on whether you believe that freedom of software needs to be enforced, or whether you trust that freedom of software will occur on its own as a natural result. Many of us, including me, are confused about where we sit on this. It's true that people should be encouraged to share their patches with others - as a centralized system would do, but should this be enforced on people as a centralized system would do? What happens in PostgreSQL today with CVS? From a pragmatic standpoint - there is no such thing as a centralized system, and there is no such thing as a de-centralized system. People work on their patches offline - whether they do this by downloading a tar file and patching a local copy, or whether they use CVS to keep up to date with HEAD, or whether they employ elaborate mirroring techniques to insulate themselves from CVS - they are not doing their actual work on a public centralized server. Only their final committed work - whatever they choose to commit - reaches the public centralized server. In many cases, patches are not welcome on the public centralized server because they are either immature, poorly designed, or contain unacceptable defects. If I want to work on a piece of PostgreSQL, I would probably work in private first, then share my changes on the list, and only once I was confident with my change, would I submit it for review and possible inclusion. Whether I use GIT or SVN or CVS or whether I use my local file system and diff between two directory hierarchies, these are merely tools to accomplish my ends. My process is basically the same no matter which tool I use. I might be more comfortable with one tool, and perhaps my productivity is artificially high on one over another because I am unwilling to invest time in learning the other - but it's all irrelevant from an open source / free software perspective. Some code is shared with the world and some is not. One hopes that the valuable code is shared. :-) Do you have reason to believe that a de-centralized system would hurt the future of PostgreSQL? Are there any cases of existing open source projects that you are aware of, that have broken due to a switch to a de-centralized system? Or is this fear of the unknown? This is an honest question - and it is a question I have asked myself. In my case, I see benefits to a de-centralized system, and benefits to a centralized system, but find neither to be compelling in terms of choosing a product. My focus has always been on tighter control of the changes, reliable merge techniques, and proper change set history storage and retrieval. I find it unfortunate that the open source / free software community has been unable to produce a best of all worlds solutions. There is no reason why SVN needs to suck at merging - except that the people who cared about merging didn't like the look of SVN and moved on to create other tools instead. :-( From a PostgreSQL perspective - it is probable inevitable that people will choose their favourite tool to use, create or re-use existing mirror technology to have their way, and the side with the most resources will win and have their way in the end. One hopes for an overall improvement. :-) Haha - that's my opinion. Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Fabien COELHO wrote: I'm not sure I would be proud to use such a stupidly named tool for a common work. I really do not share Linus humor, and apparent contempt for other people. GIT implements I want to chose whom I work with, and don't care about the others, and don't ever want to have to look at their ugly patches, or at least it is what I understood from his talk at Google last year. Would this be the future spirit of PG devel? I hope not. Yea, I saw a video of that speech and thought Linus was an embarrassment. Was he trying to be funny or engaging perhaps? If so, it didn't work. -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Christopher Browne wrote: On Feb 7, 2008 9:42 PM, Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gregory Stark escribió: For what it's worth I think GIT is a better fit for our needs. Perhaps it would be, if it worked on Windows ... Not that I care, but I bet Magnus would. http://code.google.com/p/msysgit/ Unfortunately, Git on Windows is only officially supported using Cygwin. However, there is a fork (currently in the process of being merged with official git) which enables you to compile git using MinGW/MSys. Mercurial, which is similar to GIT, offer native windows client. See there http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/BinaryPackages#head-adac70dc1664bb9eac334d5c8b57483d300254f3 It support binaries for most of PG supported platforms. I also recommend to see following page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_revision_control_software It compares a lot of SCMs. Zdenek ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Magnus Hagander wrote: Alvaro Herrera wrote: Stefan Kaltenbrunner escribió: yeah - the test install is available on http://reviewdemo.postgresql.org if people want to test judge for themself - contact magnus or me if you need permissions to do/test stuff there. Thanks. I tried submitting a review request against anoncvs but it failed with No valid separator after the filename was found in the diff header patch can apply the patch correctly -- I'm not sure what does this patch have that RB does not like. The patch is attached in case you want to play with it. If I'm not mistaken, I read somewhere in the docs that the diff has to be unified, not context. Could that be it? Yes, and second problem is CVS diff. When you use CVS diff you must strip root (/home/alvherre/Code/cvs/) from following line: RCS file: /home/alvherre/Code/cvs/pgsql/src/backend/commands/analyze.c,v and ,v as well. After that RB accepted your patch. Zdenek ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
[HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Hackers, As you know we've finally released PostgreSQL 8.3, after a development cycle that lasted well over a year despite our original plans for a 6 month cycle. The core team are aware that there are a number of factors that contributed to this slippage: - Lack of prompt and early review of patches. - A significant rise in the number and complexity of patches submitted. - Prioritising completion of incomplete patches over meeting the timetable. In the 8.4 development cycle we would like to try a new style of development, designed to keep the patch queue to a limited size and to provide timely feedback to developers on the work they submit. To do this we will replace the traditional 'feature freeze' with a series of 'commit fests' throughout the development cycle. The idea of commit fests was discussed last October in -hackers, and it seemed to meet with general approval. Whenever a commit fest is in progress, the focus will shift from development to review, feedback and commit of patches. Each fest will continue until all patches in the queue have either been committed to the CVS repository, returned to the author for additional work, or rejected outright, and until that has happened, no new patches will be considered. Of course, individual developers are free to continue working on their patches throughout the fest, but we encourage everyone to do what they can to help work through the patch queue. We feel that this idea can only be successful if the whole development community is willing to focus on patch review during the commit fests, in the same way that everyone is expected to focus on testing during beta period. The proposed timetable for the cycle is as follows: 1st March 2008 - commit fest begins 1st May 2008 - commit fest begins 1st July 2008 - commit fest begins 1st September 2008 - commit fest begins 1st November 2008 - final commit fest begins 1st January 2009 - beta 1 1st March 2009 - 8.4.0 release Note the lack of any 'feature freeze' date as such. However, any significant feature patches not submitted by 1st November will clearly not make it into 8.4. The hope here is that we will not have enormous, previously unreviewed patches landing on us at the end of October --- if that happens, we'll be back in the same position we were in at 8.3 feature freeze. Although this schedule allows for the final commit fest to take a good deal of time, we'll reserve the right to reject patches that are too large to be reviewed in a timely fashion. We want to encourage people to do development of large features in an incremental fashion, with a new increment landing during each commit fest. Regards, Dave (on behalf of the core team) -- Dave Page PostgreSQL Core Team ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 08:56 +, Dave Page wrote: Hackers, +1 Very much in favour. -- Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 08:56:51AM +, Dave Page wrote: Hackers, Looks great and well-thought through. Let's hope it works out! I assume you'll be committing this info to the developer section on the website? //Magnus ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Feb 6, 2008 1:49 PM, Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 08:56:51AM +, Dave Page wrote: Hackers, Looks great and well-thought through. Let's hope it works out! I assume you'll be committing this info to the developer section on the website? It's on the developer wiki. /D ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 02:42:35PM +, Dave Page wrote: On Feb 6, 2008 1:49 PM, Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 08:56:51AM +, Dave Page wrote: Hackers, Looks great and well-thought through. Let's hope it works out! I assume you'll be committing this info to the developer section on the website? It's on the developer wiki. Good start. /me thinks it should be on the website. We've usually announced our feature freeze dates there... (in less details, sure, but something there) //Magnus ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Feb 6, 2008 2:44 PM, Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good start. /me thinks it should be on the website. We've usually announced our feature freeze dates there... (in less details, sure, but something there) Feel free - you've been hacking that recently! /D ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Am Mittwoch, 6. Februar 2008 schrieb Andrew Dunstan: I would like to see this tied down some more. The time for the commit fests is too open ended. I think we should say something like All commit fests will run no more than two weeks, except for the final commit fest which can run for one month. Something along those lines was discussed, but we feel that because we have no experience with how commit fests will run, it is unwise to specify that much detail already. It is quite possible that as we gain experience with the process the timeline will be clarified. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
This all sounds very promising. On Feb 6, 2008 7:56 PM, Dave Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Each fest will continue until all patches in the queue have either been committed to the CVS repository, returned to the author for additional work, or rejected outright, and until that has happened, no new patches will be considered. So does this mean we will have a new patches awaiting the next review cycle queue alongside the patches awaiting review queue? Just thinking that we'll need somewhere to park the new patches which roll in during a commit fest. Or, you know, start using an actual development tracker =) Cheers BJ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Dave Page wrote: On Feb 6, 2008 3:57 PM, Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to see this tied down some more. The time for the commit fests is too open ended. I think we should say something like All commit fests will run no more than two weeks, except for the final commit fest which can run for one month. I think thats one of the problems - without knowing what patches are going to come in, or how many there will be, we have no way of knowing how long each fest will take. What this does mean though is that we continuously feedback to developers and keep the patch queue down - kinda like checkpoint smoothing I guess. I would rather set a target and modify it if necessary based on experience than have none at all. The danger of not doing so is that we'll be in almost constant 'commit fest' mode. cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Dave Page wrote: Hackers, As you know we've finally released PostgreSQL 8.3, after a development cycle that lasted well over a year despite our original plans for a 6 month cycle. The core team are aware that there are a number of factors that contributed to this slippage: - Lack of prompt and early review of patches. - A significant rise in the number and complexity of patches submitted. - Prioritising completion of incomplete patches over meeting the timetable. In the 8.4 development cycle we would like to try a new style of development, designed to keep the patch queue to a limited size and to provide timely feedback to developers on the work they submit. To do this we will replace the traditional 'feature freeze' with a series of 'commit fests' throughout the development cycle. The idea of commit fests was discussed last October in -hackers, and it seemed to meet with general approval. Whenever a commit fest is in progress, the focus will shift from development to review, feedback and commit of patches. Each fest will continue until all patches in the queue have either been committed to the CVS repository, returned to the author for additional work, or rejected outright, and until that has happened, no new patches will be considered. Of course, individual developers are free to continue working on their patches throughout the fest, but we encourage everyone to do what they can to help work through the patch queue. We feel that this idea can only be successful if the whole development community is willing to focus on patch review during the commit fests, in the same way that everyone is expected to focus on testing during beta period. The proposed timetable for the cycle is as follows: 1st March 2008 - commit fest begins 1st May 2008 - commit fest begins 1st July 2008 - commit fest begins 1st September 2008 - commit fest begins 1st November 2008 - final commit fest begins 1st January 2009 - beta 1 1st March 2009 - 8.4.0 release Note the lack of any 'feature freeze' date as such. However, any significant feature patches not submitted by 1st November will clearly not make it into 8.4. The hope here is that we will not have enormous, previously unreviewed patches landing on us at the end of October --- if that happens, we'll be back in the same position we were in at 8.3 feature freeze. Although this schedule allows for the final commit fest to take a good deal of time, we'll reserve the right to reject patches that are too large to be reviewed in a timely fashion. We want to encourage people to do development of large features in an incremental fashion, with a new increment landing during each commit fest. Regards, Dave (on behalf of the core team) I would like to see this tied down some more. The time for the commit fests is too open ended. I think we should say something like All commit fests will run no more than two weeks, except for the final commit fest which can run for one month. If we can't make that work then the whole idea is probably in trouble anyway. Another possibility which might help allocating reviewers to projects (especially large projects) earlier in the process. cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Feb 6, 2008 3:57 PM, Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to see this tied down some more. The time for the commit fests is too open ended. I think we should say something like All commit fests will run no more than two weeks, except for the final commit fest which can run for one month. I think thats one of the problems - without knowing what patches are going to come in, or how many there will be, we have no way of knowing how long each fest will take. What this does mean though is that we continuously feedback to developers and keep the patch queue down - kinda like checkpoint smoothing I guess. /D ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I would rather set a target and modify it if necessary based on experience than have none at all. We felt that we'd like to get a couple of fests under our belts before trying to nail down very many rules. The process will get more formalized later, no doubt, but let's see what the actual problems are before guessing about how to fix them. The original draft listed the first commit fest as being in May, but we added a March fest in part to have a practice run without too much stuff being on the plate. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Brendan Jurd [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Just thinking that we'll need somewhere to park the new patches which roll in during a commit fest. Bruce has always kept two patch queues, one for the current version and one for the stuff held for the next version. This won't change anything except the labels on the queues. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Feb 6, 2008 4:24 PM, Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would rather set a target and modify it if necessary based on experience than have none at all. The danger of not doing so is that we'll be in almost constant 'commit fest' mode. Yes, that is something we discussed, and the reason why we used the wording 'proposed timetable for the cycle'. We will adjust the timing if need be, but wanted to start out on a confident note :-) /D ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Dave Page wrote: On Feb 6, 2008 4:24 PM, Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would rather set a target and modify it if necessary based on experience than have none at all. The danger of not doing so is that we'll be in almost constant 'commit fest' mode. Yes, that is something we discussed, and the reason why we used the wording 'proposed timetable for the cycle'. We will adjust the timing if need be, but wanted to start out on a confident note :-) Sometimes I wish we could decide if we want to be wishy or washy ;-) cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I would rather set a target and modify it if necessary based on experience than have none at all. We felt that we'd like to get a couple of fests under our belts before trying to nail down very many rules. The process will get more formalized later, no doubt, but let's see what the actual problems are before guessing about how to fix them. The original draft listed the first commit fest as being in May, but we added a March fest in part to have a practice run without too much stuff being on the plate. OK, that makes some sense, although I don't know about the not much stuff on the plate. We presumably have quite a lot of stuff in the queue from the last 7 months or so. cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: we added a March fest in part to have a practice run without too much stuff being on the plate. OK, that makes some sense, although I don't know about the not much stuff on the plate. We presumably have quite a lot of stuff in the queue from the last 7 months or so. There is, although I think a large fraction of it will get bounced as needs more work, which should reduce the pressure. We'll just be trying to give feedback to let the patch authors move forward, which will not take as much time as actually committing would take. The current queue is http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold Note that a lot of the bulk is discussion of things that aren't anywhere near committable anyway. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Wednesday 06 February 2008 09:09, Tom Lane wrote: Brendan Jurd [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Just thinking that we'll need somewhere to park the new patches which roll in during a commit fest. Bruce has always kept two patch queues, one for the current version and one for the stuff held for the next version. This won't change anything except the labels on the queues. I think we might want to do something along the lines of what Stefan set up (at least I think it was he) for the end of 8.4 on developer.postgresql.org. Bruce's patch list is easy to update, but hard to read. I'll put some effort into it. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
The plan looks great. I am +1 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Josh Berkus escribió: I think we might want to do something along the lines of what Stefan set up (at least I think it was he) for the end of 8.4 on developer.postgresql.org. Bruce's patch list is easy to update, but hard to read. I'll put some effort into it. Easy to update for Bruce -- for anyone else it is impossible to update AFAIK. -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Alvaro Herrera wrote: Josh Berkus escribió: I think we might want to do something along the lines of what Stefan set up (at least I think it was he) for the end of 8.4 on developer.postgresql.org. Bruce's patch list is easy to update, but hard to read. I'll put some effort into it. Easy to update for Bruce -- for anyone else it is impossible to update AFAIK. Yes, I feel we could use a group writeable patch queue of some sort. Perhaps an IMAP server setup could do the job. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Feb 6, 2008 9:56 AM, Dave Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Whenever a commit fest is in progress, the focus will shift from development to review, feedback and commit of patches. Each fest will continue until all patches in the queue have either been committed to the CVS repository, returned to the author for additional work, or rejected outright, and until that has happened, no new patches will be considered. If we don't have a bench farm anytime soon, I think we should consider planning a set of benchmarks after each commit fest to prevent performance regressions on different workloads. I don't expect them to be comprehensive but it could allow us to prevent the most obvious regressions. -- Guillaume ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Josh Berkus escribió: I think we might want to do something along the lines of what Stefan set up (at least I think it was he) for the end of 8.4 on developer.postgresql.org. Bruce's patch list is easy to update, but hard to read. I'll put some effort into it. Yes, I feel we could use a group writeable patch queue of some sort. Perhaps an IMAP server setup could do the job. Seems like a wiki page with links to pgsql-patches archive entries would be easy. But an issue for any of this is who has permissions to edit the queue? I concur that Bruce only is the wrong answer, but I'm not sure anyone with a wiki account is the right answer. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:46:22 -0500 Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Seems like a wiki page with links to pgsql-patches archive entries would be easy. But an issue for any of this is who has permissions to edit the queue? I concur that Bruce only is the wrong answer, but I'm not sure anyone with a wiki account is the right answer. The Wiki accounts are controlled to a degree. If the page gets abused we remove the privilege. Remember we can always rollback changes. This is no different than email moderation imo. Joshua D. Drake -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Joshua D. Drake wrote: On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:46:22 -0500 Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Seems like a wiki page with links to pgsql-patches archive entries would be easy. But an issue for any of this is who has permissions to edit the queue? I concur that Bruce only is the wrong answer, but I'm not sure anyone with a wiki account is the right answer. The Wiki accounts are controlled to a degree. If the page gets abused we remove the privilege. Remember we can always rollback changes. This is no different than email moderation imo. Is it technically possible to set permissions on a per-page basis? //Magnus ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Le Wednesday 06 February 2008 21:35:54 Peter Eisentraut, vous avez écrit : Alvaro Herrera wrote: Easy to update for Bruce -- for anyone else it is impossible to update AFAIK. Yes, I feel we could use a group writeable patch queue of some sort. Perhaps an IMAP server setup could do the job. I've read some developers appreciating the way review board works: http://review-board.org/ http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/ http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/wiki/UserBasics This last link present the expected workflow when using the tool, and maybe you'll find this matches the project needs... I don't know if such a tool can help the project, but mentioning its existence certainly can't arm... Hope this helps, -- dim signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 22:07:06 +0100 Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joshua D. Drake wrote: On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:46:22 -0500 Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Seems like a wiki page with links to pgsql-patches archive entries would be easy. But an issue for any of this is who has permissions to edit the queue? I concur that Bruce only is the wrong answer, but I'm not sure anyone with a wiki account is the right answer. The Wiki accounts are controlled to a degree. If the page gets abused we remove the privilege. Remember we can always rollback changes. This is no different than email moderation imo. Is it technically possible to set permissions on a per-page basis? That I can't answer but consider that the people that are putting info on the wiki are mostly people we trust. We just make it clear that if you are a jack ass you will have your account removed. IMO, we are putting entirely too much energy into controlling flow of text here. You have to log in to change the text, the text is revertible as is the ability to log in in the first place. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake //Magnus -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Tom Lane wrote: Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Josh Berkus escribió: I think we might want to do something along the lines of what Stefan set up (at least I think it was he) for the end of 8.4 on developer.postgresql.org. Bruce's patch list is easy to update, but hard to read. I'll put some effort into it. Yes, I feel we could use a group writeable patch queue of some sort. Perhaps an IMAP server setup could do the job. Seems like a wiki page with links to pgsql-patches archive entries would be easy. But an issue for any of this is who has permissions to edit the queue? I concur that Bruce only is the wrong answer, but I'm not sure anyone with a wiki account is the right answer. this is basically what I did during the 8.3 cycle on the wiki - I would be willing to maintain a similiar thing for 8.4 if people think it is a good idea. Stefan ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Magnus Hagander wrote: Is it technically possible to set permissions on a per-page basis? Technically possible? Of course. It's sure not easy to do, though; the Mediawiki team considers having any real ACL structure added onto their code a non-feature and last time I checked you had to patch the source. I'd say it's really more trouble than it's worth here. It's not like the developer site is open to the whole world or something. The number of people capable of noticing and reverting bad changes in a critical, popular page vastly outnumbers those likely to do something stupid (with all the stuff I've done on the developer's wiki I don't think I've had to revert a change bigger than a grammatical error so far). -- * Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Dimitri Fontaine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Le Wednesday 06 February 2008 21:35:54 Peter Eisentraut, vous avez écrit : Yes, I feel we could use a group writeable patch queue of some sort. Perhaps an IMAP server setup could do the job. I've read some developers appreciating the way review board works: http://review-board.org/ http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/ http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/wiki/UserBasics Hmm, the info on that last page might be out of date, but what it says is that the only SCMS they really support 100% is SVN. The other ones they claim support for don't work [well/at all] with the post-review tool. It looks interesting though, and would alleviate a few of the problems people have mentioned with reviewing stuff that's posted as diffs. Has anyone here got any direct experience with it? regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 18:50:34 -0500 Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've read some developers appreciating the way review board works: http://review-board.org/ http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/ http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/wiki/UserBasics Hmm, the info on that last page might be out of date, but what it says is that the only SCMS they really support 100% is SVN. The O.k. I am not too interested in starting a whole war here (again) but for the record, we have what appears to be a perfectly working capability to move from cvs to svn. So *if* review board is something we really like, the SCM should not be the barrier. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit signature.asc Description: PGP signature
