On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 02:44:01PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > If you want to avoid both the surprise and confusion factor mentioned before, > maybe what's needed is to *remove* --analyze-in-stages, and replace it with > --analyze-missing-in-stages and --analyze-all-in-stages (with the clear > warning > about what --analyze-all-in-stages can do to your system if you already have > statistics). > > That goes with the "immediate breakage that you see right away is better than > silently doing the unexpected where you might not notice the problem until > much > later". > > That might trade some of that surprise and confusion for annoyance instead, > but > going forward that might be a clearer path?
Oh, so remove --analyze-in-stages and have it issue a suggestion, and make two versions --- yeah, that would work too. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com When a patient asks the doctor, "Am I going to die?", he means "Am I going to die soon?"
