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
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/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services