Re: Formatting Curmudgeons WAS: MMAP Buffers
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Formatting Curmudgeons WAS: MMAP Buffers |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2712.1303105430@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Formatting Curmudgeons WAS: MMAP Buffers (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: > On 04/17/2011 07:41 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> That puts the overall patch acceptance rate at perhaps 75%. >> That someone overstates the acceptance rate, because it ignores the >> patches that people post and immediately get flamed to a well-done >> crisp before adding them to the CF app, but there are not very many of >> those any more. > I don't believe there were ever terribly many of them. Well, that number also ignores patches that were *committed* without ever making it to the CF list. There aren't terribly many of those either I think, but it does happen, particularly for small patches. If you want to argue about the acceptance rate for out-of-CF-process patches you'd have to do some serious digging in the archives to say anything about what it is. But anyway this is quibbling. The point I was trying to make is that our patch acceptance rate is fairly far north of 50%, not south of it. So we might hold people's feet to the fire a bit in the process, but it's hardly impossible to get a patch committed. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: