Re: logical changeset generation v4 - Heikki's thoughts about the patch state

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, Phil Sorber <phil(at)omniti(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: logical changeset generation v4 - Heikki's thoughts about the patch state
Date: 2013-01-25 01:40:03
Message-ID: 20130125014003.GC15706@awork2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2013-01-24 20:28:41 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 02:16:09AM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> > What I am afraid though is that it basically goes on like this in the
> > next commitfests:
> > * 9.4-CF1: no "serious" reviewer comments because they are busy doing release work
> > * 9.4-CF2: all are relieved that the release is over and a bit tired
> > * 9.4-CF3: first deeper review, some more complex restructuring required
> > * 9.4-CF4: too many changes to commit.
> >
> > If you look at the development of the feature, after the first prototype
> > and the resulting design changes nobody with decision power had a more
> > than cursory look at the proposed interfaces. Thats very, very, very
> > understandable, you all are busy people and the patch & the interfaces
> > are complex so it takes noticeable amounts of time, but it unfortunately
> > doesn't help in getting an acceptable interface nailed down.
> >
> > The problem with that is not only that it sucks huge amounts of energy
> > out of me and others but also that its very hard to really build the
> > layers/users above changeset extraction without being able to rely on
> > the interface and semantics. So we never get to the actually benefits
> > :(, and we don't get the users people require for the feature to be
> > committed.
> >
> > So far, the only really effective way of getting people to comment on
> > patches in this state & complexity is the threat of an upcoming commit
> > because of the last commitfest :(
> >
> > I honestly don't know how to go on about this...
>
> This is very accurate and the big challenge of large, invasive patches.
> You almost need to hit it perfect the first time to get it committed in
> less than a year.

My primary concern really isn't to get it committed inside a year, but
to be sure to get input in-time to be able to actually continue to
work. And to commit it then. And I am absolutely, absolutely not sure
thats going to work.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Craig Ringer 2013-01-25 01:44:28 Re: Strange Windows problem, lock_timeout test request
Previous Message Greg Stark 2013-01-25 01:35:54 Re: patch submission: truncate trailing nulls from heap rows to reduce the size of the null bitmap [Review]