Re: Recovery Test Framework

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Cc: Greg Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Recovery Test Framework
Date: 2009-01-12 16:33:43
Message-ID: 1452.1231778023@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> Two things to fix this, and several other problems:

> 1. Remove the messages size limits on -hackers. They serve no useful
> purpose, and they interfere with our development process.

Agreed, or at least boost it up a good bit more.

> If -hackers
> isn't already subscriber-only, now would be the time to make it so.

Not sure how that's relevant?

> 2. Start using more git, as many hackers and committers have already
> started to do. This is the kind of situation where CVS just plain
> falls down because branching and merging are unmanageably difficult in
> it, where in git, they're many-times-a-day operations.

This is a red herring, unless your proposal also includes making the
master CVS^H^H^Hgit repository world-writable. The complaint I have
about people posting URLs is that there's no stable archive of what the
patches really were, and just because it came out of someone's local git
repository doesn't help that.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2009-01-12 16:37:28 Re: Recovery Test Framework
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-01-12 16:29:25 Re: Assertion failure in plpgsql with INSTEAD OF rule