Re: Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy] 9.6 - > 10.0 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tomasz Rybak
Subject Re: Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy] 9.6 - > 10.0
Date
Msg-id b42928e11d50264c481703de0fba011f.qmail@home.pl
Whole thread Raw
In response to Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy] 9.6 -> 10.0  (Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
I cut many of emails from CC - AFAIR most of you are subscribed to 
pg-hackers.

Dnia 2016-04-30 19:29 Joshua D. Drake napisał(a):

>On 04/29/2016 11:50 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> On 04/29/2016 11:36 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>
>>>     Egos.
>>>
>>>     Consider PgLogical, who is working on this outside of 2Q?
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you for volunteering to assist. What would you like to work on?
>>
>> You are very welcome. I have been testing as you know. I would be happy
>> to continue that and also was going to look into having a subscriber
>> validate if it is connecting to a subscribed node or not which is the
>> error I ran into.
>>
>> I am also interested in creating user docs (versus reference docs).
>
>So what do you think Simon? How about we put pgLogical under community
>infrastructure, use the postgresql redmine to track bugs, feature
>requests and documentation?
>
>I guarantee resources from CMD and I bet we could get others to
>participate as well. Let's turn this into an awesome community driven
>extension.
>

I reviewed pglogical-output extension in CF 2016-01. It was the only
patch I reviewed - it was quite big and as I was doing it afternoons
and not during work (other responsibilities) it took me more than half
of month. And while initially response was good, after final review there
was no response, no new patch version - also nothing in CF 2016-03.

At the same time I've seen that pglogical got some love in March - but
I'm not sure whether it is usable without *-output plugin. On the one
hand splitting those two makes review easier, or at least manageable.
OTOH one does not make much sense without the other. I can see that,
at least in theory, pglogical-output could be used independently, but
at the same time, its main user will be pglogical proper.

So, in summary - slightly better management and communication regarding
features and patches (not only this one; this is just the patch with
which I tried to do review) would be beneficial.
For now I'm not sure what is going on with pglogical,
and whether my review even mattered.

Best regards
Tomasz Rybak

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg9.6 segfault using simple query (related to use fk for join estimates)
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: New 9.6 external sort guidance around temp_tablespaces and maintenance_work_mem