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 <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee
