From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org> |
Cc: | Dann Corbit <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org>, mloftis(at)wgops(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: What is wrong with hashed index usage? |
Date: | 2002-06-22 04:01:02 |
Message-ID: | 200206220401.g5M413214276@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> > So, is you vote for or against the elog(NOTICE)?
>
> OK, if we are still voting, then I'll mention that I generally dislike
> the idea of notices of this kind. And would not like this notice in
> particular. So would vote no with both hands ;)
>
> I'm pretty sure that we have a consensus policy (hmm, at least if a
> consensus consists of repeated votes on one question or the other) that
> notices to protect people from doing what they ask the system to do are
> not generally desirable.
>
> Putting messages in as a spur to development is not particularly
> effective; witness a few chapters in the docs which consist of "This
> needs to be written. Any volunteers?" and which have stayed untouched
> for three years now ;)
OK, elog(NOTICE) is voted down. SGML docs are updated. We don't need
an FAQ item for this, do we?
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-06-22 04:08:16 | Re: funcapi.h:69: syntax error before `uint' |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-06-22 03:57:15 | Re: Reduce heap tuple header size |