On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 9:02 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >>>> Please lets not waste effort on refactoring efforts in mid dev cycle. > >>> Say what? When else would you have us do it? > >> When else would you have us develop? > > In my eyes that sort of activity *is* development. I find the > distinction you are drawing entirely artificial, and more calculated to > make sure refactoring never happens than to add any safety. Any > significant development change carries a risk of breakage.
You clearly have the bit between your teeth on this. That doesn't make it worthwhile or sensible though. I've offered to do it slowly and carefully over time, but that seems not enough for some reason. What is the real reason for this? I assume whoever does it will be spending significant time on testing and bug fixing afterwards. I foresee lots of "while I'm there, I thought I'd just mend X", so we'll spend lots of time fighting to keep functionality that's already there. Look at the discussion around archive_command for an example of that. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers