Horton

Re: CLOG contention, part 2

Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2012-01-22T22:30:16Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Call check_keywords.pl in maintainer-check

  2. Make the number of CLOG buffers adaptive, based on shared_buffers.

On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 6:44 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
> OT: It would save lots of time if we had 2 things for the CF app:
>
..
> 2. Something that automatically tests patches. If you submit a patch
> we run up a blank VM and run patch applies on all patches. As soon as
> we get a fail, an email goes to patch author. That way authors know as
> soon as a recent commit invalidates something.

Well, first the CF app would need to reliably be able to find the
actual patch.  That is currently not a given.

Also, it seems that OID collisions are a dime a dozen, and I'm
starting to doubt that they are even worth reporting in the absence of
a more substantive review.  And in the patches I've looked at, it
seems like the OID is not even cross-referenced anywhere else in the
patch, the cross-references are all based on symbolic names.  I freely
admit I have no idea what I am talking about, but it seems like the
only purpose of OIDs is to create bit rot.

Cheers,

Jeff