On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 2:54 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
>>> Now that Simon has submitted this, can some of the heavy-hitters here
>>> review it? Heikki?
>>>
>>> Nobody's name is next to it.
>>
>> I don't think anyone is planning to ignore this patch, but it wasn't
>> included in the first round of round-robin reviewing assignments
>> because it wasn't submitted until the following day, after the
>> announced deadline for submissions had already passed. So most people
>> are probably busy with with some other patch at the moment, but that's
>> a temporary phenomenon.
>
> Right, I've added myself as reviewer now.
>
>> This is a pretty small CommitFest, so there
>> shouldn't be any shortage of reviewers, though Heikki's time may be
>> stretched a little thin, since Streaming Replication is also in the
>> queue, and he is working on index-only scans. That's really for him
>> to comment on, though.
>
> I'm going to put the index-only scans aside for now to focus on hot
> standby and streaming replication. Both are big patches, so there's
> plenty of work in those two alone, and not only for me.
What is the best way to attack this? Should I keep reviewing
index-only scans so that you have feedback for when you get back to
it, or should I move on to something else? If something else, does it
make more sense for me to look at HS since I did a bit of work with a
previous version, or would it be better for me to just pick one of the
other patches from the CommitFest and work on that?
Also, stepping back from me personally, should we try to assign some
additional reviewers to these patches? Is there some way we can
divide up review tasks among multiple people so that we're not
repeating each others work?
Thoughts appreciated, from Heikki, Simon, or others.
...Robert
