Josh Berkus wrote: > Bruce, > > > As an example, how is patch information going to help us review HOT or > > group-item-index? There is frankly more information about these in the > > archives than someone could reasonable read. What someone needs is a > > summary of where we are now on the patches, and lots of time. > > The idea is to provide ways for other people to help where they can and to > provide better feedback to patch submitters so that they fix their own issues > faster. Also, lesser PostgreSQL hackers than you could take on reviewing the > "small" patches, leaving you to devote all of your attention to the "big" > patches. > > Actually, that can happen with the current system. The real blocker there is > that some people, particularly Tom, work so fast that there's no chance for a > new reviewer to tackle the easy stuff. Maybe the real solution is to > encourage some of our other contributors to get their feet wet with easy > patches so that they can help with the big ones later on? > > That is, if the problem is people and not tools, then what are we doing to > train up the people we need?
We seem to handle trivial patches just fine. The current problem is that the remaining patches require domain or subsystem-specific knowledge to apply, e.g. XML or WAL, and those skills are available in a limited number of people. If I had the expertise in those areas, I would have applied the patches already. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(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
