Subject: Re: PATCH: two slab-like memory allocators
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
References: <20ca0c69-e8c3-cb50-4456-f03908c672ec@2ndquadrant.com>
 <20170209213732.pykbsixeezcthotr@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <b72dfa3d-c241-8a3e-97ad-bf214b754aca@2ndquadrant.com>
 <20170211013337.iw32bvfqwta634wy@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <53def906-2197-bc06-b987-d237f9574800@2ndquadrant.com>
 <20170214022221.obhdeyfn34h6hkwj@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <19464ac8-e66b-3598-858f-29c749bec35a@2ndquadrant.com>
 <b3b2245c-b37a-e1e5-ebc4-857c914bc747@2ndquadrant.com>
 <20170224221038.43xf2cyonczzr6hb@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <20170227111732.vrx5v72ighehwpkf@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <20170227120200.5jc3ubg5jrqaznd7@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <2474a17d-9255-11a4-be40-15175aa8e168@2ndquadrant.com>
 <E0049147-F780-4BBB-B6DD-82944FC5A218@anarazel.de>
Cc: Petr Jelinek <petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.com>,
 Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
 John Gorman <johngorman2@gmail.com>
From: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
Message-ID: <03cc6ca8-bdd8-b53e-93e4-757cd80e1ce8@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 18:55:21 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <E0049147-F780-4BBB-B6DD-82944FC5A218@anarazel.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

On 02/27/2017 04:07 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
>
> On February 27, 2017 6:14:20 AM PST, Tomas Vondra
> <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> On 02/27/2017 01:02 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 2017-02-27 03:17:32 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
>>>> I'll work on getting slab committed first, and then review /
>>>> edit / commit generation.c later.  One first note there is that
>>>> I'm
>> wondering
>>>> if generation.c is a too generic filename.
>>>
>>> And pushed slab and its usage.  Will have a look at generation.c
>>> tomorrow.
>>>
>>> - Andres
>>>
>>
>> Gah. I don't want to annoy person who just committed my patch, but
>> can you give more time when asking for feedback? I mean, sending a
>> modified
>>
>> patch on Friday midnight, and committing on Monday noon does not
>> really
>>
>> give much time to look at it.
>
> Hm. The changes IMO weren't controversial (or surprising -most of
> them I had announced previously); I announced that I would when
> posting the review that I'd push the patch later that weekend. If I
> hadn't been tired after doing the review/editing I'd have just pushed
> right then and there.  It's hard to find time and attention, so not
> introducing a week of feedback time is quite worthwhile.  I listed
> the changes I made primarily for posterities sake.  Most if not all
> committers make editorializing changed around commit, so that's not
> just me.
>
> If you specifically want I can try to give you more time to look at
> an edited patch, but that'll mean things move slower.  I won't
> promise not to make minor changed just before commit either way, I
> always do another round of review just before push.
>

I also agree the changes are not particularly controversial, but then 
why to ask for comments at all? I'm OK with a committer making final 
tweaks and pushing it without asking, but if you ask for comments, let's 
give people time to actually respond.

I agree introducing weeks of delays would be silly, but I'm not asking 
for that. I'm perfectly fine with two days for feedback, as long as it's 
not a weekend + half of Monday.

regards

-- 
Tomas Vondra                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers