On 9 April 2016 at 18:37, Tatsuo Ishii <is...@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. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ <http://www.2ndquadrant.com/> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
