I think one of the things that is preventing urgency is that everyone
knows we have large patches unapplied, so they know that their lack of
activity is not holding up the release. Any way around that?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

bruce wrote:
> In talking to people who are assigned to review patches or could review
> patches, I often get the reply, "Oh, yea, I need to do that".
>
> Folks, we are six weeks into feature freeze and have made slim progress
> on getting patches reviewed and applied. As I stated earlier, we are
> now looking at August/September for beta, but that might be pushed back
> even later if we don't get more progress.
>
> It seems there is a lot of reliance on Tom to get the patches applied,
> but I don't think that is fair or reasonable. I think we need more
> urgency on the part of everyone to make faster progress. Patch
> reviewers and committers need to take more initiative to get things done
> rather than wait for some external force to prompt them.
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
> EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
>
> + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> 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

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



- --On Wednesday, May 16, 2007 20:09:44 -0400 Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
wrote:

>
> I think one of the things that is preventing urgency is that everyone
> knows we have large patches unapplied, so they know that their lack of
> activity is not holding up the release. Any way around that?

Set a fixed date (ie. 3 weeks) and whatever isn't in gets punted to 8.4 ... if
that means those 'large patches' don't get applied, so be it ...
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> bruce wrote:
>> In talking to people who are assigned to review patches or could review
>> patches, I often get the reply, "Oh, yea, I need to do that".
>>
>> Folks, we are six weeks into feature freeze and have made slim progress
>> on getting patches reviewed and applied. As I stated earlier, we are
>> now looking at August/September for beta, but that might be pushed back
>> even later if we don't get more progress.
>>
>> It seems there is a lot of reliance on Tom to get the patches applied,
>> but I don't think that is fair or reasonable. I think we need more
>> urgency on the part of everyone to make faster progress. Patch
>> reviewers and committers need to take more initiative to get things done
>> rather than wait for some external force to prompt them.
>>
>> --
>> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
>> EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
>>
>> + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> 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



- ----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org
Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFGS6Oa4QvfyHIvDvMRAtwrAJwLasoe+jiuAqvT4Dny/dndYvKxUgCcDxiX
x+vMZlGMy06D9NOfzltG/ks=
=PL+8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
>
> --On Wednesday, May 16, 2007 20:09:44 -0400 Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
> wrote:
>
>> I think one of the things that is preventing urgency is that everyone
>> knows we have large patches unapplied, so they know that their lack of
>> activity is not holding up the release. Any way around that?
>
> Set a fixed date (ie. 3 weeks) and whatever isn't in gets punted to 8.4 ... if
> that means those 'large patches' don't get applied, so be it ...

Meaning we lose a bunch of potentially very cool features, and seriously
hack off the developers who put significant time and effort into them,
in some cases producing numerous updates based on ongoing discussion and
feedback over a number of months.

And then in 8.4 we have the same problem...

I think we just have to accept that we're gonna have a long feature
freeze period, and ask people to help review whatever they can.

Regards, Dave.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

I want to help the reviewing work of "ctid chain following enhancement ".
I've been studying the souce code which related with that part recently.
:-)

2007/5/17, Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org>:
> I think we just have to accept that we're gonna have a long feature
> freeze period, and ask people to help review whatever they can.
>
> Regards, Dave.
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

Cui Shijun wrote:
> I want to help the reviewing work of "ctid chain following enhancement ".
> I've been studying the souce code which related with that part recently.
> :-)

Please go ahead :-)

Regards Dave

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

On 5/17/07, Cui Shijun <rancpine@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I want to help the reviewing work of "ctid chain following enhancement ".
> I've been studying the souce code which related with that part recently.
> :-)



Tom had objected to this patch on the grounds that it adds complexity
without any significant gains. Though I don't completely agree with the
first part, the second part is indeed debatable since the code is touched
only
for infrequently.

Thanks,
Pavan



--

EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> On 5/17/07, Cui Shijun <rancpine@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I want to help the reviewing work of "ctid chain following enhancement ".
> > I've been studying the souce code which related with that part recently.
> > :-)
>
>
>
> Tom had objected to this patch on the grounds that it adds complexity
> without any significant gains. Though I don't completely agree with the
> first part, the second part is indeed debatable since the code is touched
> only
> for infrequently.

Right. The reason the patch was kept in the queue is that there was
discussion that HOT will exercise that part of the code a lot more than
it does currently.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

I see...
I checked part of HOT patches(patch1), and found that it involves too
many things I am not currently familar with. Maybe I should change an
item to work. :-(
Since I only studied part of source codes about transaction
processing(lmgr/MVCC/xact but without xlog.c), I want to study
"Group Commit" patch and try to review it, any suggestions?

2007/5/17, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>:
> Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> > On 5/17/07, Cui Shijun <rancpine@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I want to help the reviewing work of "ctid chain following enhancement ".
> > > I've been studying the souce code which related with that part recently.
> > > :-)
> >
> >
> >
> > Tom had objected to this patch on the grounds that it adds complexity
> > without any significant gains. Though I don't completely agree with the
> > first part, the second part is indeed debatable since the code is touched
> > only
> > for infrequently.
>
> Right. The reason the patch was kept in the queue is that there was
> discussion that HOT will exercise that part of the code a lot more than
> it does currently.
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
> EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
>
> + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
>

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

Cui Shijun wrote:
> I see...
> I checked part of HOT patches(patch1), and found that it involves too
> many things I am not currently familar with. Maybe I should change an
> item to work. :-(

Yeah, that's one big patch..

> Since I only studied part of source codes about transaction
> processing(lmgr/MVCC/xact but without xlog.c), I want to study
> "Group Commit" patch and try to review it, any suggestions?

There's no group commit patch, just some discussion, and probably won't
be until 8.4.

Maybe one of these would interest you:
- deferred transaction/waitless COMMIT
- full page writes improvement
- maintaining cluster order on insert
- heap page diagnostic functions

Make sure you look at the latest version of the patches.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

Thank you for your suggestions, I am thinking about "Full page writes
improvement". It seems not so complicated, just fit for a novice like
me.
I'll work on it. :-)


2007/5/17, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com>:
> Cui Shijun wrote:
> > I see...
> > I checked part of HOT patches(patch1), and found that it involves too
> > many things I am not currently familar with. Maybe I should change an
> > item to work. :-(
>
> Yeah, that's one big patch..
>
> > Since I only studied part of source codes about transaction
> > processing(lmgr/MVCC/xact but without xlog.c), I want to study
> > "Group Commit" patch and try to review it, any suggestions?
>
> There's no group commit patch, just some discussion, and probably won't
> be until 8.4.
>
> Maybe one of these would interest you:
> - deferred transaction/waitless COMMIT
> - full page writes improvement
> - maintaining cluster order on insert
> - heap page diagnostic functions
>
> Make sure you look at the latest version of the patches.
>
> --
> Heikki Linnakangas
> EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
>

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org