On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 11:58:51PM +0200, Vik Fearing wrote:
> 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.
Well, you have been around a long time, so I assumed you would know
this, and have seen this in practice.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com
The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee