| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Removing faulty hyperLogLog merge function |
| Date: | 2016-04-27 01:35:46 |
| Message-ID: | 2514.1461720946@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I'm not prepared to commit this over the objection offered by Tomas
> Vondra on that thread.
FWIW, I agree with Peter that we should remove this code. We know that it
is buggy. Leaving it there constitutes an "attractive nuisance" --- that
is, I'm afraid that someone will submit a patch that depends on that
function, and that we might forget that the function is broken and commit
said patch.
Tomas' objection would be reasonable if a fix was simple, but so far as
I can tell from the thread, it's not. In particular, Peter doesn't trust
the upstream patch in question. But whether or not you trust it, doing
nothing is not a sane choice. The reasonable alternatives are to remove
the merge function or sync the upstream patch.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-04-27 01:56:12 | Re: EXPLAIN VERBOSE with parallel Aggregate |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2016-04-27 01:14:34 | Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2 |