Re: Re: PATCH: pageinspect / add page_checksum andbt_page_items(bytea)
От | David Steele |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: PATCH: pageinspect / add page_checksum andbt_page_items(bytea) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | ea9e7779-6774-2ab4-ffde-f5dda55d794e@pgmasters.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: PATCH: pageinspect / add page_checksum and bt_page_items(bytea) (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 4/4/17 9:43 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 9:32 AM, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net> wrote: >> My goal is to help people focus on patches that have a chance. At this >> point I think that includes poking authors who are not being responsive >> using the limited means at my disposal. > > +1. Pings on specific threads can help clear things up when, for > example, the author and reviewer are each waiting for the other. And, > as you say, they also help avoid the situation where a patch just > falls off the radar and misses the release for no especially good > reason, which naturally causes people frustration. > > I think your pings have been quite helpful, although I think it would > have been better in some cases if you'd done them sooner. Pinging > after a week, with a 3 day deadline, when there are only a few days > left in the CommitFest isn't really leaving a lot of room to maneuver. Thanks for the feedback! My thinking is that I don't want to bug people too soon, but there's a maximum number of days a thread should be idle. Over the course of the CF that has gone from 10 days, to 7, 5, and 3. I don't look at all patches every day so it can be a bit uneven, i.e., all patches are allowed certain amount of idle time, but some may get a bit more depending on when I check up on them. Thanks, -- -David david@pgmasters.net
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: