On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> In past, I have seen that we try to make sure that each patch
> gets atleast one review in CF, so do you think we should try
> that this time as well (I think patches which don't have even one
> review are not too many). To be honest, I don't have any concrete
> plan to make that happen except for identifying such patches and
> request on list for a review of those patches or may be try to review
> myself for one or more of those.
By looking at the commit fest app...
Some patches did not get a review and do not have assigned reviewers:
- CSN snapshots
- Event trigger, object creation
- Partial sort
- Refactor SSL code to support other SSL implementations
Not the easiest ones.
Some have reviewers but didn't get a review:
- Reducing impact of hints/cleanup for SELECTs
- pg_shmem_allocations view
- contrib/fastbloat - tool for quickly assessing bloat stats for a table
There are as well a couple of patches that have received some comments
but seem somewhat in a stale state:
- KNN-GiST with recheck has received comments from Heikki that have
not been addressed, so I switched it now to "Waiting on author"
- Patch for generic atomics has received some feedback but status is
unclear by looking at the commit fest app.
- Per table autovacuum vacuum cost parameters behavior change
Regards,
--
Michael
