On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > On 2015-09-02 14:36:51 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Fabien COELHO <coe...@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote: >> >> I'm wondering if percentages instead of weights would be a better >> >> idea. That'd mean you'd be forced to be more careful when adding another >> >> script (having to adjust the percentages of other scripts) but arguably >> >> that's a good thing? >> > >> > If you use only percent, then you have to check that the total is 100, >> > probably you have to use floats, to do something when the total is not 100, >> > checking would complicate the code and test people mental calculus >> > abilities. Not sure this is a good idea:-) >> >> I agree. I don't see a reason to enforce that the total of the >> weights must be 100. > > I'm slightly worried that using weights will be a bit confusing because > adding another script will obviously reduce the frequency of already > defined scripts. But it's probably not worth worrying.
That sounds like a feature to me, not a bug. I wouldn't worry. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
