Re: Built-in connection pooler - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Konstantin Knizhnik
Subject Re: Built-in connection pooler
Date
Msg-id 0fd2ee44-e75b-8d14-4192-641aa07d6c89@postgrespro.ru
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Built-in connection pooler  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: Built-in connection pooler  (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>)
List pgsql-hackers

On 17.09.2020 8:07, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 06:38:02PM +0300, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
>> Sorry, correct patch is attached.
> This needs again a rebase, and has been waiting on author for 6 weeks
> now, so I am switching it to RwF.
> --
> Michael

Attached is rebased version of the patch.

I wonder what is the correct policy of handling patch status?
This patch was marked as WfA 2020-07-01 because it was not applied any more.
2020-07-02 I have sent rebased version of the patch.
Since this time there was not unanswered questions.
So I actually didn't consider that some extra activity from my side is need.
I have not noticed that patch is not applied any more.
And now it is marked as returned with feedback.

So my questions are:
1. Should I myself change status from WfA to some other?
2. Is there some way to receive notifications that patch is not applied 
any more?

I can resubmit this patch to the next commitfest if it is still 
interesting for community.

-- 
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company


Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: Yet another fast GiST build
Next
From: Kyotaro Horiguchi
Date:
Subject: pgbench calculates summary numbers a wrong way.