| From: | Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nikolay Samokhvalov <samokhvalov(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Default gucs for EXPLAIN |
| Date: | 2020-06-02 21:58:51 |
| Message-ID: | 4bfef548-813f-4ff3-d0cc-d5e7b71278c0@postgresfriends.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 6/2/20 10:51 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 09:29:09PM +0200, Vik Fearing wrote:
>> On 6/2/20 7:25 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> I think it would have been helpful if an email explaining this idea for
>>> discussion would have been posted before a patch was generated and
>>> posted.
>>
>> Why?
>
> Because you often have to go backwards to religitate things in the
> patch, rather than opening with the design issues.
Surely that's my problem; and it looks like the only thing I need to
change in this patch is to remove the guc for ANALYZE.
> Our TODO list is
> very clear about this:
>
> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo
> Desirability -> Design -> Implement -> Test -> Review -> Commit
I can't read everything on this list (far from it), but I don't recall
any other spontaneous patch being chastised for not having the
bikeshedders-at-large do the first two steps before the implementer.
--
Vik Fearing
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2020-06-02 22:56:13 | Re: race condition when writing pg_control |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2020-06-02 20:54:41 | Re: Hybrid Hash/Nested Loop joins and caching results from subplans |