pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg Smith <greg@2ndQuadrant.com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: PgHacker <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [v9.4] row level security
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 18:34:22 -0400
Message-ID: <51EF04EE.8010504@2ndQuadrant.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51EECBB6.4010504@agliodbs.com>
References: <CADyhKSUq+BHPAEdrNQXy_bFSzz2SG29vzJmDUh4p20iWje8QSg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANPAkgtgZbOE5-iU17Gy+_YWODe5UBsfZg6+rk2v=bNQRo0wgA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADyhKSVoCHMnnGX0Z2b8dgfCUoE1XGdtbAz2HXE4+Q3ajgoxrQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANPAkgvcL+w2scZqEcXwX5-TMe9EEORLcHDesJeTn8yoZsc0=g@mail.gmail.com>
	<51E880CF.3000902@gmail.com>
	<51E8A8C1.2050700@2ndQuadrant.com>
	<20130719030347.GV15510@tamriel.snowman.net>
	<51E8ADD9.5020600@2ndQuadrant.com>
	<CAEZATCXdj4E8uPHxq7jiE=1gGVB0xyeHtE8wUjHoX385sHhx4Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADyhKSWw1RY01tyuhRzu2HAa_+B9Z5qS6Jv+HEA1w0C9Ua2QLQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<51ED95BC.6070400@2ndQuadrant.com>
	<WM!c1afed1e22ee997691605f7faaf15e25b70edf09cbfb322a09a707e96db70172e2bd8984779fa5ae1c976322b8ceedf5!@asav-2.01.com>
	<51EEAB03.2060605@agliodbs.com>
	<51EEBA84.3030201@2ndQuadrant.com>
	<WM!bb6c4ef74149fd41bfefac93555993908116cd94a30071c92b56e85657029e20898538a11e44a85ffef2d5500c625eb0!@asav-2.01.com>
	<51EECBB6.4010504@agliodbs.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>

On 7/23/13 2:30 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:

> You know as well as me that, as consultants, we can get clients to pay for 10% extra time
> for review in the course of developing a feature

Before this number gets quoted anywhere, I think it's on the low side. 
I've spent a good bit of time measuring how much time it takes to do a 
fair offsetting review--one where you put as much time in as it takes to 
review your submission--and I keep getting numbers more in the 20 to 25% 
range.  The work involved to do a high quality review takes a while.

I happen to think the review structure is one of the most important 
components to PostgreSQL release quality.  It used to be a single level 
review with just the committers, now it's a two level structure.  The 
reason the Postgres code is so good isn't that the submitted development 
is inherently any better than other projects.  There's plenty of bogus 
material submitted here.  It's the high standards for review and commit 
that are the key filter.  The importance of the process to the result 
isn't weighed as heavily as I think it should be.

-- 
Greg Smith   2ndQuadrant US    greg@2ndQuadrant.com   Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.com


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



view thread (165+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <51EF04EE.8010504@2ndQuadrant.com>
Permalink:  ../51EF04EE.8010504@2ndQuadrant.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/51EF04EE.8010504@2ndQuadrant.com

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: greg@2ndQuadrant.com, josh@agliodbs.com
  Subject: Re: [v9.4] row level security
  In-Reply-To: <51EF04EE.8010504@2ndQuadrant.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox