Commit Fest 2019-01 is now closed
Hi all,
As per $subject, CF 2019-01 is now closed for business. Here is the
final score:
Committed: 58.
Moved to next CF: 113.
Withdrawn: 4.
Rejected: 3.
Returned with Feedback: 52.
Total: 230.
I have done a pass over all the remaining entries, updating them
according to their last status (hopefully!). There may be some
mistakes, so please feel free to update a patch if you think that its
status is not correct. This CF is no exception in the fact that many
patches had a status on the CF app which was not consistent with the
actual thread. So please be careful about that if you are an author
or a reviewer.
Thanks,
--
Michael
From: Michael Paquier [mailto:michael@paquier.xyz]
As per $subject, CF 2019-01 is now closed for business. Here is the final
score:
Committed: 58.
Moved to next CF: 113.
Withdrawn: 4.
Rejected: 3.
Returned with Feedback: 52.
Total: 230.
Wow, thank you so much for your hard work. The last CF for PG 12 should be tough...
Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa
On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 06:34:50AM +0000, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
From: Michael Paquier [mailto:michael@paquier.xyz]
As per $subject, CF 2019-01 is now closed for business. Here is the final
score:
Committed: 58.
Moved to next CF: 113.
Withdrawn: 4.
Rejected: 3.
Returned with Feedback: 52.
Total: 230.Wow, thank you so much for your hard work. The last CF for PG 12 should be tough...
Agreed. I am somewhat concerned about this and am wondering what we can
do now to limit problems.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 06:34:50AM +0000, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
Wow, thank you so much for your hard work. The last CF for PG 12 should be tough...
Agreed. I am somewhat concerned about this and am wondering what we can
do now to limit problems.
There's been talk periodically of having an aggressive triage effort
to try to sort through the pending patches and decide which ones have
no hope of making it to commit in the last CF. Then, if we just push
those off to the next cycle immediately and focus our attention on the
ones that do have a credible chance, we might get more of the latter
ones done.
regards, tom lane
On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 11:55:37AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 06:34:50AM +0000, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
Wow, thank you so much for your hard work. The last CF for PG 12 should be tough...
Agreed. I am somewhat concerned about this and am wondering what we can
do now to limit problems.There's been talk periodically of having an aggressive triage effort
to try to sort through the pending patches and decide which ones have
no hope of making it to commit in the last CF. Then, if we just push
those off to the next cycle immediately and focus our attention on the
ones that do have a credible chance, we might get more of the latter
ones done.
The ones I am really worried about are the ones that keep getting
delayed, e.g., CTE inlining, online checksums, multi-variate statistics.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 11:55:37AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
There's been talk periodically of having an aggressive triage effort
to try to sort through the pending patches and decide which ones have
no hope of making it to commit in the last CF. Then, if we just push
those off to the next cycle immediately and focus our attention on the
ones that do have a credible chance, we might get more of the latter
ones done.
The ones I am really worried about are the ones that keep getting
delayed, e.g., CTE inlining, online checksums, multi-variate statistics.
The only thing keeping me from committing CTE inlining today is doubt
about whether we have consensus on the syntax. Those other two I don't
know the status of.
regards, tom lane
On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 12:02:23PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 11:55:37AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
There's been talk periodically of having an aggressive triage effort
to try to sort through the pending patches and decide which ones have
no hope of making it to commit in the last CF. Then, if we just push
those off to the next cycle immediately and focus our attention on the
ones that do have a credible chance, we might get more of the latter
ones done.The ones I am really worried about are the ones that keep getting
delayed, e.g., CTE inlining, online checksums, multi-variate statistics.The only thing keeping me from committing CTE inlining today is doubt
about whether we have consensus on the syntax. Those other two I don't
know the status of.
I am thinking we should see which items we really want for PG 12 _now_
and allocate resources/help to get them done, rather than being
surprised they didn't make it. I am glad we are in good shape with
CTEs, since that has been a long-requested feature.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
Hi,
On 2019-02-05 11:55:37 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 06:34:50AM +0000, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
Wow, thank you so much for your hard work. The last CF for PG 12 should be tough...
Agreed. I am somewhat concerned about this and am wondering what we can
do now to limit problems.There's been talk periodically of having an aggressive triage effort
to try to sort through the pending patches and decide which ones have
no hope of making it to commit in the last CF. Then, if we just push
those off to the next cycle immediately and focus our attention on the
ones that do have a credible chance, we might get more of the latter
ones done.
I'm planning to do a pass like I did for v11's last CF before the start
of it. That still requires others to chime in, my opinion alone
shouldn't be the sole deciding factor...
What we'd talked about briefly at the Fosdem dev meeting was that a
field 'target release' or 'target branch' would be very useful to be
able to focus attention more. There's plenty stuff in the current CF
that is getting some attention, and deserves a bit more, but that
clearly isn't aimed for v12. Being able to filter by that would be huge.
Magnus has said he'd try creating something like that.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
Hi,
On 2019-02-05 12:02:23 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 11:55:37AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
There's been talk periodically of having an aggressive triage effort
to try to sort through the pending patches and decide which ones have
no hope of making it to commit in the last CF. Then, if we just push
those off to the next cycle immediately and focus our attention on the
ones that do have a credible chance, we might get more of the latter
ones done.The ones I am really worried about are the ones that keep getting
delayed, e.g., CTE inlining, online checksums, multi-variate statistics.The only thing keeping me from committing CTE inlining today is doubt
about whether we have consensus on the syntax. Those other two I don't
know the status of.
Online checksums has been punted by Magnus, because he didn't have time
to work on it so far. I'd provided him with a prototype of the necessary
infrastructure piece.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 9:08 AM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
What we'd talked about briefly at the Fosdem dev meeting was that a
field 'target release' or 'target branch' would be very useful to be
able to focus attention more. There's plenty stuff in the current CF
that is getting some attention, and deserves a bit more, but that
clearly isn't aimed for v12. Being able to filter by that would be huge.
That sounds like a good idea to me.
--
Peter Geoghegan
On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 6:08 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
Hi,
On 2019-02-05 11:55:37 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 06:34:50AM +0000, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
Wow, thank you so much for your hard work. The last CF for PG 12
should be tough...
Agreed. I am somewhat concerned about this and am wondering what we
can
do now to limit problems.
There's been talk periodically of having an aggressive triage effort
to try to sort through the pending patches and decide which ones have
no hope of making it to commit in the last CF. Then, if we just push
those off to the next cycle immediately and focus our attention on the
ones that do have a credible chance, we might get more of the latter
ones done.I'm planning to do a pass like I did for v11's last CF before the start
of it. That still requires others to chime in, my opinion alone
shouldn't be the sole deciding factor...What we'd talked about briefly at the Fosdem dev meeting was that a
field 'target release' or 'target branch' would be very useful to be
able to focus attention more. There's plenty stuff in the current CF
that is getting some attention, and deserves a bit more, but that
clearly isn't aimed for v12. Being able to filter by that would be huge.Magnus has said he'd try creating something like that.
This has now been pushed and is available. I've set it up with stable, 12
and 13 as possible versions for now, but I have not added any tags to the
existing patches (except for one, in order to test it).
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/>
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>
On 6 Feb 2019, at 21:09, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
This has now been pushed and is available. I've set it up with stable, 12 and 13 as possible versions for now, but I have not added any tags to the existing patches (except for one, in order to test it).
The patch has omitted the ending </td> tag from the patch view, fixed in the
attached diff.
cheers ./daniel
Attachments:
cf_targetver_td.diffapplication/octet-stream; name=cf_targetver_td.diff; x-unix-mode=0644Download+1-1
On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 9:38 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
On 6 Feb 2019, at 21:09, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
This has now been pushed and is available. I've set it up with stable,
12 and 13 as possible versions for now, but I have not added any tags to
the existing patches (except for one, in order to test it).The patch has omitted the ending </td> tag from the patch view, fixed in
the
attached diff.
Ugh. Thanks, applied.
//Magnus
On 6 Feb 2019, at 21:37, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
On 6 Feb 2019, at 21:09, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
This has now been pushed and is available. I've set it up with stable, 12 and 13 as possible versions for now, but I have not added any tags to the existing patches (except for one, in order to test it).
The patch has omitted the ending </td> tag from the patch view, fixed in the
attached diff.
The main view also needs to bump the colspan of the category headings, as per
the attached diff.
cheers ./daniel
Attachments:
cf_targetver_colspan.diffapplication/octet-stream; name=cf_targetver_colspan.diff; x-unix-mode=0644Download+1-1
On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 9:46 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
On 6 Feb 2019, at 21:37, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
On 6 Feb 2019, at 21:09, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
This has now been pushed and is available. I've set it up with stable,
12 and 13 as possible versions for now, but I have not added any tags to
the existing patches (except for one, in order to test it).The patch has omitted the ending </td> tag from the patch view, fixed in
the
attached diff.
The main view also needs to bump the colspan of the category headings, as
per
the attached diff.
Double argh. I had that one fixed, but managed to unfix it in a merge
conflict resoluation.
Thanks!
/Magnus
On 6 Feb 2019, at 21:47, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 9:46 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se <mailto:daniel@yesql.se>> wrote:
On 6 Feb 2019, at 21:37, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se <mailto:daniel@yesql.se>> wrote:
On 6 Feb 2019, at 21:09, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net <mailto:magnus@hagander.net>> wrote:
This has now been pushed and is available. I've set it up with stable, 12 and 13 as possible versions for now, but I have not added any tags to the existing patches (except for one, in order to test it).
The patch has omitted the ending </td> tag from the patch view, fixed in the
attached diff.The main view also needs to bump the colspan of the category headings, as per
the attached diff.Double argh. I had that one fixed, but managed to unfix it in a merge conflict resoluation.
Thanks for applying, the rendered HTML looks fine now.
cheers ./daniel
On 2019-Feb-06, Magnus Hagander wrote:
This has now been pushed and is available. I've set it up with stable, 12
and 13 as possible versions for now, but I have not added any tags to the
existing patches (except for one, in order to test it).
I added a few more tags. Cool stuff, thanks!
--
�lvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
On 06/02/2019 21:09, Magnus Hagander wrote:
This has now been pushed and is available. I've set it up with stable,
12 and 13 as possible versions for now, but I have not added any tags to
the existing patches (except for one, in order to test it).
What is the meaning of this? If something is meant for 13, shouldn't it
be moved to the next commit fest?
I find the current display a bit hard to read. If we are going to use
the white-on-color style, perhaps each version could have a different
color. Or just make it plain black-on-white text.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Hi,
On 2019-02-07 12:53:39 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 06/02/2019 21:09, Magnus Hagander wrote:
This has now been pushed and is available. I've set it up with stable,
12 and 13 as possible versions for now, but I have not added any tags to
the existing patches (except for one, in order to test it).What is the meaning of this? If something is meant for 13, shouldn't it
be moved to the next commit fest?
Why? There's plenty stuff that's chugging along in development but ought
to be processed at less urgency / by different people, than the stuff
targeted to be committed soon. It's already frustrating to contribute to
postgresql for new people, but if they don't get feedback for half a
year because they submitted around December / January it's almost
guaranteed that they vanish. Additionally, there's an increasing amount
of development projects that are too large to complete in a single
cycle, and if we just stop looking at them for half a year, they'll also
not succeed.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
On 08/02/2019 00:53, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 06/02/2019 21:09, Magnus Hagander wrote:
This has now been pushed and is available. I've set it up with stable,
12 and 13 as possible versions for now, but I have not added any tags to
the existing patches (except for one, in order to test it).What is the meaning of this? If something is meant for 13, shouldn't it
be moved to the next commit fest?I find the current display a bit hard to read. If we are going to use
the white-on-color style, perhaps each version could have a different
color. Or just make it plain black-on-white text.
If your eyesight is poor, then odd colour combinations like white on
grey, or other colours, is hard to read.
Ten years ago, before about 7 eye operations, poor contrast would be
extremely difficult, if not impossible, for me to read.
Remember also that about 1 in 12 men are colour blind.
Cheers,
Gavin
