On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Chris Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org> wrote:
> robertmhaas@gmail.com (Robert Haas) writes:
>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Kevin Grittner
>> <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> wrote:
>>> Well, I'm comfortable digging in my heels against doing *lame* hints
>>> just because "it's what all the other kids are doing," which I think
>>> is the only thing which would have satisfied the OP on this thread.
>>> From both on-list posts and ones exchanged off-list with me, it
>>> seems he was stubbornly resistant to properly tuning the server to
>>> see if any problems remained, or posting particular problems to see
>>> how they would be most effectively handled in PostgreSQL. We
>>> obviously can't be drawn into dumb approaches because of
>>> ill-informed demands like that.
>>
>> Nor was I proposing any such thing. But that doesn't make "we don't
>> want hints" an accurate statement. Despite the impression that OP
>> went away with, the real situation is a lot more nuanced than that,
>> and the statement on the Todo list gives the wrong impression, IMHO.
>
> I have added the following comment to the ToDo:
>
> We are not interested to implement hints in ways they are commonly
> implemented on other databases, and proposals based on "because
> they've got them" will not be welcomed. If you have an idea that
> avoids the problems that have been observed with other hint systems,
> that could lead to valuable discussion.
>
> That seems to me to characterize the nuance.
Where exactly are the problems with other systems noted? Most other
systems have this option so saying "They have problems" is a giant cop
out.
--
Rob Wultsch
wultsch@gmail.com