David Rowley <dgrowle...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, 18 Aug 2025 at 13:10, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>> If we do that, I guess that we could just remove HASH_DEBUG, keeping
>> only HASH_STATISTICS.
> I wondered about that and thought that there might be an above zero
> chance that someone would want HASH_DEBUG without USE_ASSERT_CHECKING.
> I don't really know if that person exists. It certainly isn't me.
Yeah, it's really quite unclear what the existing HASH_DEBUG printout
is good for. At least in our usage, it doesn't tell you anything
you can't discover from static code analysis. I'm +1 for just
dropping it altogether.
regards, tom lane
