Re: CF3+4 (was Re: Parallel query execution)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: CF3+4 (was Re: Parallel query execution)
Дата
Msg-id CA+TgmoYxJHC70sth17bLAks7J9+MAOWz-bJ4mDrNXEHe4j2KSQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: CF3+4 (was Re: Parallel query execution)  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: CF3+4 (was Re: Parallel query execution)  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sometime this type of high-level summary review does happen, at the senior
> person's whim, but is not a formal part of the commit fest process.
>
> What I don't know is how much work it takes for one of those senior people
> to make one of those summary judgments, compared to how much it takes for
> them to just do an entire review from scratch.

IME, making such summary judgements can often be done in a few
minutes, but convincing that the patch submitter that you haven't
created the objection purely as an obstacle to progress is the work of
a lifetime.  We could perhaps do better at avoiding perverse
incentives, there.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Stephen Frost
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Further pg_upgrade analysis for many tables
Следующее
От: Stephen Frost
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Thinking about WITH CHECK OPTION for views