On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:14 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I think there's been something of a professionalization of PostgreSQL
development over the last few years. More and more people are able
to get paid to work on PostgreSQL as part or in a few cases all of
their job.
On Thursday, January 24, 2013 2:58 AM Stephen Frost wrote:
Heikki,
* Heikki Linnakangas (hlinnakan...@vmware.com) wrote:
FWIW, here's how I feel about some the patches. It's not an
exhaustive list.
Thanks for going through them and commenting on them.
built-in/SQL Command to edit
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Yeah, and a lot more fairly-new developers who don't understand all the
connections in the existing system. Let me just push back a bit here:
based on the amount of time I've had to spend fixing bugs over the past
five
On 2013-01-23 11:44:29 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Yeah, and a lot more fairly-new developers who don't understand all the
connections in the existing system. Let me just push back a bit here:
based on the amount of time
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 02:04:14PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
IMHO that's the single most important task of a review.
Really? I'd say the most important task for a review is does the patch
do what it says it does?. That is, if the patch is supposed to
On 01/23/2013 09:08 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-01-23 11:44:29 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Yeah, and a lot more fairly-new developers who don't understand all the
connections in the existing system. Let me just push back a
On 01/23/2013 09:51 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
The only way to fix increasing bug counts is through more-comprehensive
regular testing. Currently we have regression/unit tests which cover
maybe 30% of our code. Performance testing is largely ad-hoc. We don't
require comprehensive acceptance
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
For all of that, I'm not sure that people failing to seek consensus
before coding is really so much of a problem as you seem to think.
For my part, I don't think the lack of consensus-finding before
submitting patches is, in itself, a problem.
The
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
For all of that, I'm not sure that people failing to seek consensus
before coding is really so much of a problem as you seem to think.
For my part, I don't think the lack of
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
For all of that, I'm not sure that people failing to seek consensus
before coding is really so much of a
On 23.01.2013 20:44, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
For all of that, I'm not sure that people failing to seek consensus
before coding is really so much of a problem as you seem to think.
For my part, I don't think the lack of consensus-finding before
Heikki,
* Heikki Linnakangas (hlinnakan...@vmware.com) wrote:
FWIW, here's how I feel about some the patches. It's not an exhaustive list.
Thanks for going through them and commenting on them.
Event Triggers: Passing Information to User Functions (from 2012-11)
I don't care about this whole
Hello
I do that pretty often. A better approach, imv, would be making psql a
bit more of a 'real' shell, with loops, conditionals, better variable
handling, etc.
after a few years prototyping on this area I am not sure so this is
good idea. Maybe better to start some new console from
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
In this connection I refer you to Sturgeon's Law(*): 90% of everything
is crud. Applied to our problem, it says that 90% of all patch ideas
are bad. Therefore, we should be expecting to reject a large fraction
of submitted patches. It distresses me that
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In this connection I refer you to Sturgeon's Law(*): 90% of everything
is crud. Applied to our problem, it says that 90% of all patch ideas
are bad.
That reminds of my conversation with our masters thesis guide who is a
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I'm not going to pretend that all review comments are constructive,
but I also think that to some degree the difference between these two
things depends on your perspective. I recall, in particular, the
email that prompted the famous in short: -1 from
Yeah, agree. May be we need to put that in the process itself. So no
patch be submitted unless the idea has been discussed and agreed upon
to some extent. Of course, few things you will only know once you
start writing the code. But at least the major points must have been
accepted by at
On 01/22/2013 01:15 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Yeah, and a lot more fairly-new developers who don't understand all the
connections in the existing system.
I think it's just in the nature of the beast we're dealing with to be
much more conservative about what we accept than it might be for some
On 22/01/13 22:35, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
In this connection I refer you to Sturgeon's Law(*): 90% of everything
is crud. Applied to our problem, it says that 90% of all patch ideas
are bad. Therefore, we should be expecting to reject a large fraction
of
IMHO that's the single most important task of a review.
Really? I'd say the most important task for a review is does the patch
do what it says it does?. That is, if the patch is supposed to
implement feature X, does it actually? If it's a performance patch,
does performance actually improve?
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
IMHO that's the single most important task of a review.
Really? I'd say the most important task for a review is does the patch
do what it says it does?. That is, if the patch is supposed to
implement feature X, does it actually? If it's a performance
But even before that, you have to ask whether what it's supposed to do
is something we want.
The reviewer can't usually answer that though.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 2:09 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
But even before that, you have to ask whether what it's supposed to do
is something we want.
The reviewer can't usually answer that though.
They can answer whether THEY want it, though. And Tom, Andrew, and I
all just got
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
As a junior reviewer, I'd like to know if my main task should be to decide
between 1) writing a review convincing you or Tom that your judgement is
hasty, or 2) to convince the
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 8:18 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Here's a breakdown based purely on the names from the CF page (i.e. I
didn't check archives to see who actually posted reviews, and didn't
take into account reviews posted without updating the CF page).
FWIW, I
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 8:18 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
Here's a breakdown based purely on the names from the CF page (i.e. I
didn't check archives to see who actually posted reviews, and didn't
take
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Dimitri Fontaine
dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
Advice:You don't do things that way, this way is the only one we
will ever accept, because we've been sweating blood over
the years to get in a position where it now works.
Robert,
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/28927.1236820...@sss.pgh.pa.us
That's not a positive review, but when it comes down to it, it's a
pretty factual email. IMHO, anyway, and YMMV.
Really? I've always thought that was a pretty constructive review. It
certainly gave me the laundry
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 8:23 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
What I don't like is when I
(or anyone) posts a patch and somebody says something that boils down
to no one wants that. *That* ticks me off. Because you know what?
At a minimum, *I* want that. If I didn't, I wouldn't
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 8:47 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
My own experience is different from yours, I guess. I actually like
it when I post a patch, or suggest a concept, and Tom fires back with
a laundry list of reasons it won't work.
This can be a problem with new submitters,
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 8:47 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/28927.1236820...@sss.pgh.pa.us
That's not a positive review, but when it comes down to it, it's a
pretty factual email. IMHO, anyway, and YMMV.
Really? I've always thought that was a
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 8:47 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
My own experience is different from yours, I guess. I actually like
it when I post a patch, or suggest a concept, and Tom fires back with
a laundry list of
Pavan Deolasee pavan.deola...@gmail.com writes:
For me our reluctance for any kind of change is a major demoralizing
factor.
I hardly think we're reluctant for any kind of change --- the rate of
commits belies that. What we want is a convincing case that a proposed
change is an improvement
On Jan 22, 2013 1:31 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Phil Sorber p...@omniti.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 8:18 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
Here's a breakdown based purely on the names from the CF page (i.e. I
didn't
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
Sometime this type of high-level summary review does happen, at the senior
person's whim, but is not a formal part of the commit fest process.
What I don't know is how much work it takes for one of those senior people
to
On 20 January 2013 18:42, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
Sometime this type of high-level summary review does happen, at the senior
person's whim, but is not a formal part of the commit fest process.
What I
2013/1/20 Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com:
On 20 January 2013 18:42, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
Sometime this type of high-level summary review does happen, at the senior
person's whim, but is not a formal
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
(Without meaning to paraphrase you in any negative way...)
Judgements made in a few minutes are very frequently wrong, and it
takes a lot of time to convince the person making snap decisions that
they should revise
On Sunday, January 20, 2013, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 20 January 2013 18:42, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.comjavascript:;
wrote:
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Jeff Janes
jeff.ja...@gmail.comjavascript:;
wrote:
Sometime this type of high-level summary review does happen, at the
senior
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
As a junior reviewer, I'd like to know if my main task should be to decide
between 1) writing a review convincing you or Tom that your judgement is
hasty, or 2) to convince the author that your judgement is correct.
That's
On 01/20/2013 09:37 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
As a junior reviewer, I'd like to know if my main task should be to decide
between 1) writing a review convincing you or Tom that your judgement is
hasty, or 2) to convince the
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:04 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
On 01/20/2013 09:37 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
As a junior reviewer, I'd like to know if my main task should be to
decide
between 1) writing a
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
As a junior reviewer, I'd like to know if my main task should be to decide
between 1) writing a review convincing you or Tom that your judgement is
hasty, or 2) to convince the
On 21.01.2013 02:07, Jeff Janes wrote:
As a junior reviewer, I'd like to know if my main task should be to decide
between 1) writing a review convincing you or Tom that your judgement is
hasty, or 2) to convince the author that your judgement is correct. That
would provide me with some
On Thursday, January 17, 2013, Magnus Hagander wrote:
Would it help to step up a few developers and create a second line of
committers ? The commits by the second line committers will still be
reviewed by the first line committers before they make into the product,
but
may be at later
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:19 AM, Pavan Deolasee
pavan.deola...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
At 2013-01-16 02:07:29 -0500, t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In case you hadn't noticed, we've totally lost control of
the CF
At 2013-01-16 02:07:29 -0500, t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In case you hadn't noticed, we've totally lost control of
the CF process.
What can we do to get it back on track?
I know various people (myself included) have been trying to keep CF3
moving, e.g. sending followup mail, adjusting patch
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
At 2013-01-16 02:07:29 -0500, t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In case you hadn't noticed, we've totally lost control of
the CF process.
What can we do to get it back on track?
Not sure. One start might be to actually
On 16 January 2013 08:21, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
At 2013-01-16 02:07:29 -0500, t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In case you hadn't noticed, we've totally lost control of
the CF process.
What can we do to get it back on track?
Totally lost control is an overstatement. The
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 16 January 2013 08:21, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
At 2013-01-16 02:07:29 -0500, t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In case you hadn't noticed, we've totally lost control of
the CF process.
What can we do
At 2013-01-16 13:08:27 +0100, mag...@hagander.net wrote:
One start might be to actually start having commitfest managers.
(I'm skipping over this point, since Craig's nomination as CF manager is
being discussed elsewhere in this thread.)
As in it technical works, but it's better to do it in a
2013-01-16 14:18 keltezéssel, Abhijit Menon-Sen írta:
At 2013-01-16 13:08:27 +0100, mag...@hagander.net wrote:
One start might be to actually start having commitfest managers.
(I'm skipping over this point, since Craig's nomination as CF manager is
being discussed elsewhere in this thread.)
Simon Riggs escribió:
On 16 January 2013 08:21, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
At 2013-01-16 02:07:29 -0500, t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In case you hadn't noticed, we've totally lost control of
the CF process.
What can we do to get it back on track?
Totally lost
* Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
I would like to nominate Craig Ringer to be independent CF mgr for Jan2013
CF.
Seconded. I particularly like the fact that Craig is not already a PG
developer, so he's not going to be working on his own patches.
So when can he start? :D
On 01/16/2013 10:02 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
I would like to nominate Craig Ringer to be independent CF mgr for
Jan2013 CF.
Seconded. I particularly like the fact that Craig is not already a PG
developer, so he's not going to be working on
On 01/16/2013 08:12 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
I would like to nominate Craig Ringer to be independent CF mgr for
Jan2013 CF.
I'm happy to step up and help out.
--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training Services
--
Sent via
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 01:08:27PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
At 2013-01-16 02:07:29 -0500, t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In case you hadn't noticed, we've totally lost control of
the CF process.
What can
I would like to nominate Craig Ringer to be independent CF mgr for Jan2013 CF.
+1, although I'll suggest that we should have *two* CF managers for this
one to keep the workload manageable.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
I would like to nominate Craig Ringer to be independent CF mgr for Jan2013
CF.
+1, although I'll suggest that we should have *two* CF managers for this
one to keep the workload manageable.
That has never worked before,
On 01/17/2013 06:01 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
I would like to nominate Craig Ringer to be independent CF mgr for Jan2013
CF.
+1, although I'll suggest that we should have *two* CF managers for this
one to keep the workload
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.comwrote:
At 2013-01-16 02:07:29 -0500, t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In case you hadn't noticed, we've totally lost control of
the CF process.
What can we do to get it back on track?
I know various people (myself
61 matches
Mail list logo
