From: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
To: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: multivariate statistics v14
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2016 20:29:16 +0200
Message-ID: <3d9919e9-6fe6-e3c4-d1e7-cd0192ed58d5@2ndquadrant.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANP8+j+HZTnnBFxEVvi_qCOTs6a8x+HjjS=q+uy9cAQrLup5vw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5d1d62a6-6228-188c-e079-c1be59942168@2ndquadrant.com>
<20160409.082146.2151665005996934911.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp>
<77be1e99-4f97-9a0c-64b7-472fa0ba4800@2ndquadrant.com>
<20160410.023757.532440443943028713.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp>
<CANP8+j+HZTnnBFxEVvi_qCOTs6a8x+HjjS=q+uy9cAQrLup5vw@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
On 04/10/2016 10:25 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 9 April 2016 at 18:37, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org
> <mailto:ishii@postgresql.org>> wrote:
>
> > But I still think it wouldn't move the patch any closer to committable
> > state, because what it really needs is review whether the catalog
> > definition makes sense, whether it should be more like pg_statistic,
> > and so on. Only then it makes sense to describe the catalog structure
> > in the SGML docs, I think. That's why I added some basic SGML docs for
> > CREATE/DROP/ALTER STATISTICS, which I expect to be rather stable, and
> > not the catalog and other low-level stuff (which is commented heavily
> > in the code anyway).
>
> Without "user-level docs" (now I understand that the term means all
> SGML docs for you), it is very hard to find a visible
> characteristics/behavior of the patch. CREATE/DROP/ALTER STATISTICS
> just defines a user interface, and does not help how it affects to the
> planning. The READMEs do not help either.
>
> In this case reviewing your code is something like reviewing a program
> which has no specification.
>
> That's the reason why I said before below, but it was never seriously
> considered.
>
>
> I would likely have said this myself but didn't even get that far.
>
> Your contribution was useful and went further than anybody else's
> review, so thank you.
100% agreed. Thanks for the useful feedback.
--
Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com, simon@2ndQuadrant.com, ishii@postgresql.org, robertmhaas@gmail.com, david@pgmasters.net, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, alvherre@2ndquadrant.com, petr@2ndquadrant.com, jeff.janes@gmail.com
Subject: Re: multivariate statistics v14
In-Reply-To: <3d9919e9-6fe6-e3c4-d1e7-cd0192ed58d5@2ndquadrant.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox